Yes you read it hear first Folks.
THT - this is where ALL the worlds firsts get made public FIRST.
You want the latests and greatest in breaking world news - forget CNN and ABC - THT has the earliest news anywhere on the planet - you were privy to this secret Waaaay back in MAY...and here in August the rest of the worlds just catching on!
Will trouty be Time Magazine's man of the year? [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif[/img]
What next?.. the Nobel prize for science? [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]
Do you remember trouty had to explain to Fidster why the speed of light wasn't a constant?...
Maybe refresh your memorys first eh?
Read it here!
http://thehulltruth.com/6/ubb.x?a=tp...0231#462600231
quote:Pay attention closely - there will be 100 question test at the end of this OK? ;o)
That the speed of light isn't a constant or the new energy equatio E= TC2 where T is delta T or change in time?
You drink tea at all fid?...no course not - bourbon wasn't it?
Oh well - for the time one - you'll need to imagime yaself miniaturised and floating on a tea leaf thats a raft spinning in the middle of a very large cup of tea.
You see - Albert E as I'll call him for short, he relied upon these couple clowns mitchellson morleys experiments for his rationalthat the speed of light was a constant - a couple other clowns whose names escape me at the moment, previously said it wasn't but mitchellson Morley said it was and won out coz their theory made Alberts work.
In truth it's splitting hairs anyway - to all intents and purposes, the speed of light within our frame of reference is constant - but it may well not be a universal constant.
The Ether of space is what this is all about you see - both the Scalar electromagnetics, And the speed of light - Ether of space is whats eluded us - in fact all of the most subtle of energys gravity - space ether are the forces of nature we understand least - catastrophic things like lightning volcanoes, Tsunamis, heck we know all about em but the subtle ones were not so good on.
Now, when Mitchellson morley concluded that the speed of light was a constant they actually measured the speed, a couple different directions and said - yup close enough - we'll assume that it's a constant.
What they didn't take into account was this ether which wasn't and mostly still isn't well understood.
Tesla probably understood it best at his time but lots has been overlooked since then.
With the either they at first thought it was a vacuum - the absense of air, then the absence of all gasses etc etc.
In the speed of light assumptions..they ended up with two possibilities - either there was an ether and the speed of light was constant - or their wasn't an either, and the speed of light wasn't constant.
They picked numba one - there was an ether, and the speed of light was constant.
Their failing was - a third possibility, and that was: that there is an ether, but that it swirls about the planet rotating at about the same speed as the planet - sorta being dragged along with the earth like a giant space blanket swirting in the same direction as the earth, and at the same speed so that to us stand8ing on the earth it appeared to be stationary not moving.
Sorta like imagining the gulf stream flowing down the coast and as it gets further and further out it slows and eddies around gradually mixing with the waters of the main ocean etc..
If this third space ether possibility is allowed - then the light speeds Mitchellson Morley observed might not have been constant - over the whole universe, but only within that part of the space ether imediately adjacent to earth where their experiements were carried out!
Perhaps the speed of light actually slows ever so slightly, If the experiment were conducted in deep space or another galaxy for example where the space ether is swirling in a different direction or at a different speed due to the space blanket effect of other space bodies planets stars.
You still with me - this was a third possibility that was never considered that alowed for the first two clowns experiments to be verified and also allowed for mitchellson / morleys observed results suggesting the measured speeds were close enough to be considered consistent.
So - theres a possibility (now becomming a probablity with more recent research from deep space probes) that the speed of light isn't actually constant at all - near but not quite constant.
S - the C in Alberts E=MC2 may not in fact be a constant.
Albert knew this, it was what he was workin on when he pegged it poor ol bugger.
It's been our fundamental belief that C is a constant thats held back the abilty to fathom the 4th dimension Time.
Now that corrections to speed of light and hence phsics are being rewritten - we have been able to break loose the energy locked up in time.
This is where the new energy equation E = Delta tee Cee Squared (E=Tc2) where T is delta T or change in time.
I'll putit in full for you - might cause a brain phart if you try and swallow it at one sitting - have several goes at it and you'll see it works and is the reason why scalar electromagnets works!
This new equation - called the "trouty theory of scalar electromagnetics"...just incase anyone tries to beat me to the punch a naming my theorem...is what I beleeve gie\ven time and adequate funding will unlock scalar electro gravitic propulsion - the real prize.
US Govt have had this for a while - well since a while after they reverse engineered it following Roswell anyway, but this is the first time anyone outside covert ops has had access to it.
Yup - trouty said the speed of light wasn't a constant AND gave a proof analogy my famous "Fidster" bourbon and ice analogy!
Well - wouldn't you know it!
Some whizz kid from downundah, rocket scientist or something - thats it - a astronomer, named Murphy - has claimed to discover that the speed of light is slowing down!
Murphy's Law.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s660466.htm
quote:Murphy's Law
Thursday, 29 August 2002
Michael Murphy
One of the most basic rules of physics is that the speed of light doesn’t change – it’s constant. That’s the basis of Einstein’s most famous equation – E=mc2 – where c is the speed of light. But in the last few weeks, that fundamental 'fact' has been under extraordinary attacks by a group of Australian scientists who suggest the speed of light is slowing down!
Jonica Newby goes inside the impressive radio telescope array at Narrabri to meet one of the young men behind the controversy. Rookie physicist Michael Murphy helped open this can of wormholes, and now he’s frantically searching the heavens to try and confirm whether it’s true. If so, it will have major implications for our understanding of how the universe was formed. But there are plenty of sceptics to convert– not everyone’s convinced it’s time to overturn a fundamental law of physics.
Sceptics like Susan Scott are going to take a lot of convincing. She says we should err on the side of conservatism. And her gut feeling is that they’re going to be proven wrong.
But Michael Murphy is determined to be the one to find out. He’ll keep on scouring the heavens above Narrabri until he knows for sure – are we or are not going to have to write a new law of physics?
After all, Murphy’s Law doesn’t have a bad ring to it. (full transcript...)
Reporter: Jonica Newby
Producer: Tim Clark
Researcher: Geraldine McKenna & Owen Craig
Related Sites:
Michael Murphy's Web Page at UNSW
Professor John Webb's web page at UNSW
A description of the UNSW team's research
Full Program Transcript:
Narration: Looking out at the light of ancient galaxies, this young physicist observed something very strange. His measurements indicated that the speed of light could have changed. For 80 years, Einstein and science have maintained the speed of light is constant. But now, there’s an extraordinary claim – that the speed of light may be slowing down.
Michael Murphy: The fundamental difference will be this very big conceptual change in the way we see the universe.
Charles Lineweaver: If its true then it rates with one of the most effective discoveries that science has made I think.
Geoff Bicknell: Effectively I think it would turn the universe inside out.
Narration: So what on earth is the universe coming to? Is a constant, no longer a constant? Tonight, rookie physicist Michael Murphy begins the crucial next stage of his research. He’s at the Narrabri radio telescope, desperate to confirm his original findings.
Michael Murphy: If we’re right, this is a very big change to physics. Either we’re right or we’re wrong - because this is a very important question.
Narration: That’s why he’s searching for quasars – primordial galaxies that form superbright beacons from the edge of the universe. It was a problem with the spectrum produced by quasar light that caught Murphy’s attention originally.
Michael Murphy: Here we’ve got a background light source this is just producing all the colours of the rainbow. – that’s just like the quasar that’s shining at us from a distance. When the light of quasars passes through gas clouds from deep space, it produces lines on the spectrum – as unique as a fingerprint.
Jonica Newby: So this is the fingerprint of the gas clouds?
Michael Murphy: Yes, that is
Narration: If all was right with our understanding of the universe, then the fingerprints from the nearest and most distant readings should have been identical. But they weren’t.
Jonica Newby: The fingerprint has changed.
Michael Murphy: That’s right.
Narration: They were left with a seemingly unthinkable conclusion: something called the alpha fine structure constant, which includes electromagnetism and the speed of light, had changed.
Michael Murphy: It’s very hard. You know you’re sitting there in a conference or something telling all these learned professors about how everything they’ve been studying for ages is incorrect.
Narration: Murphy’s observations implied that at the time of the Big Bang, the speed of light may have been faster. Particles of light – photons – may have started life with a sprint. That was the startling conclusion cosmologist Charles Lineweaver came to, when he decided to play with the idea.
Dr Charley Lineweaver: Jonica – now, are you ready for this experiment? You are the centre of the universe, and I am a photon.
(Lineweaver demonstrates how if the speed of light was faster at the origin of the universe, it’s much further away than we thought.)
Jonica Newby: So you’re saying that the universe is actually bigger than we thought.
Dr Charley Lineweaver: If the results turn out to be true, that is correct.
Narration: But let’s just hold it a minute. Perhaps we should take a reality check. That’s certainly what some scientists are saying. At the Mount Stromlo Observatory in Canberra, scientists became so concerned about all the media hype, they put out a press release.
Susan Scott: I think at this stage there’s a deep scepticism and if you like, read conservatism, as perhaps one should as scientists until things are really properly and totally verified to not sort of you know jump off the deep end and say oh it’s all wrong.
Narration: Even Lineweaver has his doubts about the original measurements.
Dr Charley Lineweaver: My best guess is however I think that it’s probably systematic error. It might go away, but if it’s true, it’s very profound.
Narration: Meanwhile, its 7.30 am at Narrabri, and Murphy is still intensely searching the heavens for proof.
Michael Murphy: If I’m not the one to prove whether we’re right or we’re wrong, then I’ll be very angry.
Narration: Right or wrong, it will have been a hell of an exciting ride for a physicist who hasn’t even finished his PhD yet. And if it turns out to be true, Murphy’s Law could go down in history.
Michael Murphy: It would have to compare in significance I guess to the start of relativity itself when Einstein first put out his theory.
Narration: This will be a similar conceptual change. It will say the constants aren’t constants, they change. That will mean that we have to think about the very fundamentals of the universe, the way space time acts, the way the particles interact with each other, that will completely change altogether.
And more from the same thread!
quote:I didn't mean to fast track past the solar tea cup analogy, just thought most folks already understood the c not being constant.
You see we only think it's a constant because of MM's experiments but G Sagnac in 1913 performed his version of the M-M experiment and corrected the inconclusive results, which MM's test had obtained.In Sagnacs rotational analogue of the M-M test the celocity of light was shown to vary.
Also in 1925 Mitchellson and Gale verified Sagnac's results with their own rotational analogue. Even more recently, similar verification has been made using a ring laser system to detect the rotational velocity of the earth relative to the ether.
ye the time the ether wind was proven to exist Alberts theorys were already winning strong support on themerits of celestial observations which closely agreed with Alberts predicted values.
quote:The error of the M-M experiment is: "the test results are ALSO VALID for the case where there IS a space ether, and IT TOO is moving along with the same relative velocity and orbit as earth maintaines around the sun.
The solar tea cup (bourbon glass for you fid!) analogy can be used to explain the error.
If one stirs a cup of tea (preferrably black with two sugars please!), (or in fids case swirls the glass a bourbon untill the ice cube in the middle is spinning), which has some tea leaves floating on it's surface (thats the ice cube for you Fid!), one notices some of these tea leaves (ice cube) orbiting the vortex in the centre of the cup (glass).
The tea leaves (ice cube) closer to the centre travel faster than those farther from the centre (both in linear and angular velocity).
Now one must imagine must imagine himself greatly reduced in size (this should be no trubble Fid - just imagine your the right size for that brain a yours ;o) ) and sitting upon one of those orbiting leaves (ooohh chilly a$$ eh Fid..you on de ice man! hehehe).
If one were to put his hands over the edge of the tea leafe (ice cube) on any side (don't waste the bourbon Fid buddy remember to lick your fingers after OK?), would he feel any tea (bourbon) moving past?...No.
(Fingers now too cold to feel much at all in Fids case!).
The reason is that the motion of the tea (bourbon) is the force that has caused the velocity of the leaf (ice cube). One could not detect any motion of both the himself and the tea (bourbon) were travelling in the same direction and at the same velocity.
However, if one had arms long enough (like a Gorilla - Fid probably qualifies here, LOL LOL) to stick a hand in the tea (bourbon) closer to either the centre or rim of the cup (glass) where the velocitys were different to his own, then he would feel the tea (bourbon) moving fatser or slower than himself respectively!
Also if one were to spin his tea leaf raft (ice cube) whoooo heee circus ride, at the same time as it orbits about the centre, placing his hands into the tea (bourbon) immediately surrounding his tea leaf raft (ice cube), would show inertial resistance against the spin moment of his leaf raft (ice cube).
Solar Tea (Bourbon) Cup (glass).
Still with us Fid buddy?...probably pissed bye now - been slurpin the bourbon eh? Have one fa me Fid! ;o)
In the preceding analogy, the centre of the spinning tea (bourbon) or voretx centre represented the Sun (ooooh hot - got at night time!).
The Leaf (ice cube) represents the Earth,
The tea (bourbon represents the either,
And the riders (Fid buddy...now too pissed to care!) hands = the light beams of the Mitchellson - Morley test!
In essence (or bourbon) what Michelson, Morley, Einstein and many other scientists since have said is that the m-M test showed the velocity of light was NOT AFFECTED by the earths orbital motion. THEREFORE they have said we have TWO (BIG BOLD UNDERLINED TWO COZ THIS IS THE PHUUKKKERUPPER) TWO conclusions we can draw.
1) The Earth is orbiting the sun and their is no ether (Bloddy pi$$tank Fid bugga he drunk it all!) or
2) The earth is not orbiting the sun and there is an ether but since the earth is not moving thru the ether, the ether wind cannot be detected.
Obviusly number two option is negated by the observed heliocentric orbit.
HOWEVER; (stay with us Fid Buddy - don't wanna lose you now!) their rasonig should have incorporated a third option.
3. Fids Theorem. "The Earth is orbiting the sun AND SO IS THE ETHER"!!!! (Therefore no ether wind could be detected in the orbital vector immediately in the vicinity of the earth.
In other words, the M-M test results CANNOT PROVE OR DISPROVE the existence of an ether ony whether or not the earth is moving relative to such an ether.
quote:"C" not contsant!
Remeber that in 1913, Sganac performed his version of the M-M exxperiment and corrected the inconclusive results which Michellson & Morley's test had obtained In Sagnacs rotational analogue of the M-M test, the velocity oflight was shown to vary.
Also in 1925 Michelson and gale verified sagnacs results with their own rotational analog. Even pre recently similar verification has been made using a ring laser system (look out Fid buddy - I laser you ring hehehe!) to detect the rotaional velocity of the Earth relative to the ether!
So - you see e does not = MC 2 since C (speed of light) is not constant but known to vary
Well, just remember trouty proved it first, right here at THT and 3 months ago at that!.
Soo - get that email working - let Time Magazine know, that trouty discovered it first, & proved it here at THT, datestamped a full 3 months ahead of anyone else in the world!. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif[/img]
So far this wizz kid still hasn't caught up with the rest of my Grand Unification Theorem of the universe M=DeltaT, but give him time. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]
As usual - the rest of the world lags about 3 months behind the superior intellect of trouty - no wonder Olive Oyl has the hots for him! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif[/img]
Today the fish - tomorrow the world!
Get emailig the press people - this Murphy fella's trying to claim the credit for MY proof that C is not constant! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif[/img]
Cheers!
[This message was edited by trouty on 08-29-02 at 09:28 AM.]
Breaking World News - trouty's speed of light NOT constant theorem proven by science! 
