First Prev
of 2
Next Last
nakayama

Kawasaki, Japan

#21 Nov 7, 2012
How about diurnal aberration of the moon at the pole of the earth ? If it’s 0, emission theory (in moon-earth scale) seems to be true.

And why on the moon, annual aberration is not subject ?

A web-site says “planetary aberration is combination of aberration and light-time correction”. Yes, light-time correction must be grasped as angle. Time is not main subject at all, i believe (so, naming is wrong).
nakayama

Kawasaki, Japan

#22 Nov 10, 2012
Why annual aberration caused by earth’s motion (30 km/sec) doesn’t occur on the moon ? In moon-earth scale, emission theory will be valid. And many facts (such as corner cube set on the moon’s surface) will support it.
nakayama

Kawasaki, Japan

#23 Nov 17, 2012
Value of light-time correction for the moon is 0.704 arcsec (corresponds to moon’s speed on orbit). And annual aberration (20.496 arcsec ; max) is not observable for the moon. These are different fundamentally from observational facts for all celestial bodies (except for artificial bodies ; earth’s motion 30 km/sec is not reflected).

Reason will be nothing but nearby distance (imagine an instant). The emission theory will be true (in moon-earth scale).
nakayama

Kawasaki, Japan

#24 Nov 17, 2012
In moon-earth scale, emission theory seems to be valid. If so, understanding as follows will be possible (if there is no mistake).

Imagine that two horizontal lines and a vertical line cross. The moon is situated at the upper intersection and the earth is at the lower. Point of this thought experiment is an instant when the moon moves horizontally. Now, value of light-time correction for the moon is 0.704 arcsec (corresponds to moon’s speed on orbit). But is it true ? It will be possible to say that the earth is moving (because there is no rest frame). If so, this value will be possible to be regard as value of aberration (on the earth).

In moon-earth scale, real aberration and real light-time correction will not exist (because aether doesn’t act at all).
nakayama

Kawasaki, Japan

#25 Nov 19, 2012
In the above figure, replace the moon and the earth with two space ships.

Distance between the moon and the earth is measured to meter level (with light beam). This will mean that emission theory is valid in moon earth scale (if aether acts, difference km level will be measured).
nakayama

Kawasaki, Japan

#28 Nov 20, 2012
-Annual aberration for the moon ; An Apology- i forgot my view that i posted before.

A light source and an observer move in a uniform motion at the same speed (along parallel lines ; imagine an instant only). The observer doesn’t observe aberration, because aberration is offset fully by light-time correction (each is composed of v and c). About secular aberration for the sun (seen from the earth), it will be the same. But about the moon, thing is different if emission theory is valid (in moon-earth scale). Anyway, annual aberration for the moon is not observable.
nakayama

Kawasaki, Japan

#29 Nov 21, 2012
Imagine a figure that is shown in the above post (Nov 17). Along the lower line, two space ships are moving at different speed. One observes value 0.704 arcsec and the other 1.408 arcsec. What is this value ? This value will be recognized as not light-time correction (like) but aberration (like).
nakayama

Nihon'odori, Japan

#30 Jun 24, 2013
It's reconsideration on previous post (Oct 17 2012) ; "Does light-time correction occur in earthly scale (in vacuum)?"

On the north pole, it will be detectable when light beam are emitted to right and left (with moving direction of the earth). Reason is that speed of orbital motion of the earth is 30km/sec, so, beam's sliding will several cm per 100m (if the emission theory is not true). However, it needs enough level of vacuum.
nakayama

Yokohama, Japan

#31 Oct 29, 2013
In outer space, there is a pillar made of glass (floating horizontally : section is square : we see a long side). From the upper right and the upper left, two star lights are coming. Wavelength is supposed to be the same. When wavelength in the glass is the same also, the glass is at a standstill in aether (in x direction).

P.S. The above is based on the view that light speed is variable.
nakayama

Yokohama, Japan

#32 Nov 1, 2013
Allow me to rewrite my former post(sep 7 2009) as follows.

In outer space, a box is floating. To the roof, plane waves of a star (the first gratitude) are coming just horizontally. On the roof, there is a small hole. So, on the floor, a spot-light is projected. Angle of light ray in the box will not be 90 degrees angle generally.

With two stars, box’s motion relative to aether (in x, y, z direction) will be measured.
nakayama

Yokohama, Japan

#33 Dec 23, 2013
It’s unthinkable that motion relative to nothing causes change of momentum. Uniform linear motion will be a motion that follows aether frame.
nakayama

Tokyo, Japan

#34 Dec 24, 2013
When frequency and wavelength of two star lights (that are coming from the opposite direction) are measured (in outer space), state of observer’s motion (relative to aether) will be clarified. And with four stars, direction and speed (relative to the celestial sphere) will be clarified also.

P.S. Light speed relative to aether will be clarified.
P.S. Speed of aether drift may be dozens of km/sec. Above measurement will not be easy.
nakayama

Tokyo, Japan

#35 Aug 18, 2014
Supplement to the above (Dec 24, 2013)
Or, to measure speed of star light directly (in outer space) is easier ?
nakayama

Tokyo, Japan

#36 Aug 23, 2014
About Aether Drift

On the moon’s surface, there is an interferometer. It receives two rays of light that are coming from a star (situated near the horizon). One ray is coming directly, and the other ray propagates a plate glass. This glass moves from just in front of the interferometer toward the star (along a guide rail). As the glass moves, interference fringe (of two waves) will change connectedly. From this, light speed (in the direction of the star) will be found. If interference fringe changes, and if the same measurement is done (at the same time) on a star situated at the opposite position on the celestial sphere, all (in the direction of the stars) will be clarified.
Note : A light that penetrated the glass will follow the emission theory. The other light will follow aether frame.
sonoran2

Houston, TX

#37 Aug 26, 2014
nakayama wrote:
-Light-Time Correction for the Moon-
If laser beam is returned always by corner cube set on the moon’s surface, the emission theory seems to be true. And light-time correction will not occur. Or in moon- earth scale, two theories (emission theory & theory that propagation of light follows aether frame) are valid partly ?
Information is lacking and common view (on light-time correction) is beside the point.
You are very persistent, indeed! My Essay II is not finished yet, but it is titled, "The Ether Found" and it is an explanation of why it was not found and what it is, IMHO.
nakayama

Yokohama, Japan

#38 Aug 28, 2014
To sonoran2,

Thank you so much for quoting a core part of my IMHO.

You wrote “persistent”. But Einstein is more persistent, isn’t he ?
sonoran2

Houston, TX

#39 Aug 29, 2014
nakayama wrote:
To sonoran2,
Thank you so much for quoting a core part of my IMHO.
You wrote “persistent”. But Einstein is more persistent, isn’t he ?
Yes, he was nothing if not persistent! But so were many others throughout history, and so are we today - some of us more so than others. It takes more than that, IMO, to be able to analyze ideas for logical consistency and appropriate conclusions.

The problem is, however, that there is a great difficulty in explaining ideas. It seems to me that the more one knows, the harder it is to teach it to others. You seem to be curious about the ideas you have encountered and for which you seek to learn more about. It takes curiosity first and persistence second, IMO, to get from others understandable explanations.

With those two traits, I set off in search of better explanations by reviewing the logic behind the research and the resulting conclusions. I found little logic in much research, which set me on a different course: to analyze by critical thinking how well explanations make sense, or IOWs, do they arrive at logical conclusions.

As I did that, I arrived at alternative conclusions, and I put them into essay form with greatly detailed explanations of what I mean and what I propose to be my findings. I am writing about the ether too, that it does exist, what it is and why, for my second essay, "The Ether Found" which is so far unfinished. Each essay leads logically to the next one and everything fits neatly together.

Each one exposes the flaws in many old ideas but offers new ones to take their place. No one is perfect, of course, but I find it takes a lot to overthrow my ideas. It can happen, though, if they are wrong.
nakayama

Yokohama, Japan

#41 Sep 30, 2014
《P.S.: to #36 》 The aim of this measurement is to find a one - 5000 speed difference. This will be easier than MM experiment.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Physics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Relativity of Simultaneity Fri nakayama 1
MM Experiment & Einstein (Dec '13) Dec 18 nakayama 5
Something from something Dec 15 nanoanomaly 1
UCSB Professor Shuji Nakamura to Receive Japan'... Dec 9 Switches 89
How Life's Code Emerged From Primordial Soup (Sep '09) Dec 9 The Dude 326
Liu's 'Three-Body Problem' is compelling sci-fi Dec 7 Kid_Tomorrow 1
Did NASA Validate an "Impossible" Space Drive? ... Nov 29 Andarz Abedini 5
More from around the web