Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2017 4:43 PM
454 online now:
jar, kjsimons, NoNukes, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Rrhain (6 members, 448 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 801,990 Year: 6,596/21,208 Month: 2,357/2,634 Week: 20/525 Day: 20/11 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1314151617
18
Author Topic:   Speed of Light
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1059
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 256 of 268 (671600)
08-28-2012 4:12 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by David Carroll
08-24-2012 11:59 PM


Re: c & t
Or - as is my contention - it could possibly mean that the speed of light has changed over time, or possibly over space.

I should say that in modern physics, especially after relativity, c is not considered a fundamental constant. This is because c can be eliminated from equations by a simple change of units. More correctly however c arises because human being measure time and space differently.
We measure the x,y,z coordinates with one unit, meters and the t coordinate with completely separate unit, seconds. Both should really be measured with meters. A second is just 300,000,000 meters in time.

However if we keep our standard units equations have to be fitted with a factor, c = 300,000,000 m/s, in order to account for this mismatch of units.

The only physically real parameter associated with light is alpha, the fine structure constant, measuring how much light couples to matter. There has yet to be an experimental test or cosmological observation which shows statistically significant variation in alpha. Also if alpha varied, there should be an alpha particle, which we should have detected already if it existed, but we haven't.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by David Carroll, posted 08-24-2012 11:59 PM David Carroll has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Coragyps, posted 08-28-2012 8:52 AM Son Goku has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5266
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 6.1


Message 257 of 268 (671604)
08-28-2012 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Son Goku
08-28-2012 4:12 AM


Re: c & t
there should be an alpha particle, which we should have detected already if it existed, but we haven't.

A different alpha particle, you meant to say?

'Course, you real physicists likely don't regard two protons bound to two neutrons as a particle, anyway. More like a dozen?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Son Goku, posted 08-28-2012 4:12 AM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Son Goku, posted 08-28-2012 1:53 PM Coragyps has not yet responded
 Message 260 by justatruthseeker, posted 11-22-2014 10:31 AM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1059
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 3.5


(3)
Message 258 of 268 (671626)
08-28-2012 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by Coragyps
08-28-2012 8:52 AM


Re: c & t
A different alpha particle, you meant to say?

Ah, yes! You're right of course. I could say a fine-structure particle. Alpha is often called the fine-structure constant.

The reason for this particle is that if something is no longer just a number, if it has different values at different points in space and time, then it is a field. And under quantum mechanics all fields are associated with particles.

'Course, you real physicists likely don't regard two protons bound to two neutrons as a particle, anyway. More like a dozen?

Actually that question has two different answers!

Firstly an alpha particle could be considered a collection of twelve quarks as you said.

However quarks don't actually exist at the current temperature of the universe. Quarks only existed early on in the universe's history. When we say that the proton is made out of quarks we actually mean that if the universe became extremely hot again the proton would become three quarks, it's not actually made out of them. It also acts a lot like it's a collection of three quarks in certain experiments. However technically there are no quarks inside a proton.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Coragyps, posted 08-28-2012 8:52 AM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 521 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 259 of 268 (742585)
11-22-2014 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Hoof Hearted
06-19-2008 9:25 AM


Because one, cosmological redshift has nothing to do with the Doppler Effect - as we measure "nearby" Galaxies. It is purely a quantum mechanical and electrodynamic effect in plasma - 99% of the universe.

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hubble/

It is that medium through which light travels, and is certainly not magical bending, expanding, accelerating nothing (spacetime).

Do not be swayed by believers in magic Fairie Dust.


If one closes their eyes they can imagine a universe of infinite possibilities, but until one opens their eyes they will never see the light.

Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory - Fairie Dust.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Hoof Hearted, posted 06-19-2008 9:25 AM Hoof Hearted has not yet responded

    
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 521 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 260 of 268 (742592)
11-22-2014 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by Coragyps
08-28-2012 8:52 AM


Re: c & t
'Course, you real physicists likely don't regard two protons bound to two neutrons as a particle, anyway. More like a dozen?

They also like to say a neutron is composed of three quarks. Yet upon decay a solitary neutron becomes a proton (3 quarks) an electron and an antinuetrino (3 more quarks and another proton and electron)????

And we have yet to "see" an electron - but just what appears as a "cloud" of particles, in whatever area of the orbit we look.

Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.


If one closes their eyes they can imagine a universe of infinite possibilities, but until one opens their eyes they will never see the light.

Fairie Dust - Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Coragyps, posted 08-28-2012 8:52 AM Coragyps has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Admin, posted 11-22-2014 10:38 AM justatruthseeker has responded
 Message 262 by JonF, posted 11-22-2014 10:57 AM justatruthseeker has responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12390
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 261 of 268 (742596)
11-22-2014 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 260 by justatruthseeker
11-22-2014 10:31 AM


Topic Reminder
Hi JustATruthSeeker,

Instead of posting off-topic messages here and elsewhere, could you please take your electric universe discussion to the thread you were using last year: The cosmic conspiracy. Thanks.

To everyone else: please, no responses to JustATruthSeeker in this thread.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by justatruthseeker, posted 11-22-2014 10:31 AM justatruthseeker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by justatruthseeker, posted 11-23-2014 1:23 AM Admin has responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 262 of 268 (742604)
11-22-2014 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 260 by justatruthseeker
11-22-2014 10:31 AM


Re: c & t
Can't resist:

They also like to say a neutron is composed of three quarks

No, they don't Electrons and antineutrinos are not composed of quarks in any theory.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by justatruthseeker, posted 11-22-2014 10:31 AM justatruthseeker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by justatruthseeker, posted 11-23-2014 1:28 AM JonF has not yet responded

  
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 521 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 263 of 268 (742696)
11-23-2014 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 261 by Admin
11-22-2014 10:38 AM


Re: Topic Reminder
Unless you have an actual working model of anything, I'd advise you take your outdated, gas light era theories to another forum - one that deals with Fairie Dust, because frankly - that's all you got.

You and I both know it's because you understand this is a battle you have already lost - and that's why you want silence, because Fairie Dust can't handle the light of day.

Because the only thing off-topic is your comment, since my response dealt directly with the original post.

Why is it then, that red-shift occurs when observing distant galaxies which are moving away from us?

If you can't answer it without resorting to magic fairie Dust, don't blame me for your lack of science.


If one closes their eyes they can imagine a universe of infinite possibilities, but until one opens their eyes they will never see the light.

Fairie Dust - Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by Admin, posted 11-22-2014 10:38 AM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Admin, posted 11-23-2014 9:54 AM justatruthseeker has responded

    
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 521 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 264 of 268 (742697)
11-23-2014 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 262 by JonF
11-22-2014 10:57 AM


Re: c & t
You justy showed you lack any knowledge when it comes to particle physics, so why are you even commenting?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron

According to particle physics, the electron is an elementary particle and contains no quarks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron

Really, learn your science first. Would of took you 10 seconds to look that up, 5 seconds more than it took you to waste my time with that incorrect post.


If one closes their eyes they can imagine a universe of infinite possibilities, but until one opens their eyes they will never see the light.

Fairie Dust - Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by JonF, posted 11-22-2014 10:57 AM JonF has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12390
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 265 of 268 (742720)
11-23-2014 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 263 by justatruthseeker
11-23-2014 1:23 AM


Re: Topic Reminder
Hi JustATruthSeeker,

I'm not a participant in the discussion. I don't have a position on the topic. I'm moderating, not discussing.

It is the practice here at EvC Forum to request that members who have one answer for everything to confine their advocacy for that answer to a single thread. You appear to be a member who has one answer for everything, namely the electric universe. Therefore I'm asking you to confine your participation to the The cosmic conspiracy. thread. Or you can propose a new thread over at Proposed New Topics and I will review your proposal as quickly as practical.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by justatruthseeker, posted 11-23-2014 1:23 AM justatruthseeker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by justatruthseeker, posted 11-26-2014 9:18 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 521 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 266 of 268 (743114)
11-26-2014 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by Admin
11-23-2014 9:54 AM


Re: Topic Reminder
It has an answer to everything, because 99% of the universe is in the plasma state. Instead, you want to treat it like solids, liquids and gasses, which plasma behaves nothing like, and then complain when rational people don't accept your Fairie Dust. All because you refuse to treat plasma like plasma. So now who is ignoring the reality?

But I'll tell you what. Why don't you show me one single plasma experiment in the laboratory, where they ignored those electromagnetic forces? Just one????

That's what I thought, so perhaps you should confine those Fairie Dust theories where they belong, in the era of gas lights.

Did you ever stop to wonder why you require 95% Fairie Dust outside the solar system? It's because the solar system is composed of solids, liquids and gasses - and the galaxy is composed of plasma. So why do you insist we only consider gravitational theories when no Plasma Physicists in the world considers it all all?

It isn't that the gravitational theories that describe the behavior of neutral matter - solids, liquids and gasses (planetary systems) are incorrect, they simply do not apply to a plasma universe.

The sooner you accept the reality of plasma physics, the sooner we can get rid of all that Fairie Dust for treating plasma like solids, liquids and gasses; when you sure can't show one single solitary laboratory experiment where any scientists has ever done so. Just cosmologists, where plasma physics in a universe 99% plasma is not even required reading. Go figure.

But you mean answers for everything like mainstream claims to have???? So I guess they belong right there in that thread as well?????


If one closes their eyes they can imagine a universe of infinite possibilities, but until one opens their eyes they will never see the light.

Fairie Dust - Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Admin, posted 11-23-2014 9:54 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 521 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 267 of 268 (763410)
07-24-2015 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Hoof Hearted
06-19-2008 9:25 AM


If you want to get on the right track, you first must put their View Masters down and ignore that Fairie Dust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eojmYTbumZ8

Because redshift has nothing to do with cosmological expansion.

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hubble/

Because cosmologist's still insist on applying gravitational theory to plasma behavior - despite the fact that not one single plasma physicist in any laboratory does so.

Because they apply the wrong physics to 99% of the universe - plasma - they require those 95% ad-hoc assumptions.

Parallax is only good for 200 parsecs (652 ly), of which both redshift and blue shift is observed. Beyond this they use only their incorrect belief in redshift to determine distances. It is plasma density and charge which causes redshift through bremsstrahlung.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFFl9S39CTM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sb_EWnXCu2w


If one closes their eyes they can imagine a universe of infinite possibilities, but until one opens their eyes they will never see the light.

Fairie Dust - Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Hoof Hearted, posted 06-19-2008 9:25 AM Hoof Hearted has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by Admin, posted 07-24-2015 5:18 PM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12390
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 268 of 268 (763430)
07-24-2015 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by justatruthseeker
07-24-2015 2:19 PM


Hi JustATruthSeeker,

I'm requesting again that you confine your participation about the electric universe to the The cosmic conspiracy. thread. The next post you make about the electric universe to any other thread will result in your suspension.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by justatruthseeker, posted 07-24-2015 2:19 PM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1314151617
18
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017