Re: Fraud in Experimental and Theoretical Science


jgreenfield@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Timo Nieminen wrote:
On Fri, 9 Feb 2006, PD wrote:

jgreenfield@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

If you are bored shitless by this "illusions are reality" fantasy,
just ask a few times how length contraction occurs at night
(in the abscence of light)

You think that length contraction is only visible in the daytime?

Generally, length contraction isn't "visible" at all, since the
1st-order-in-v/c optical illusion effects will usually be _much_ bigger.
Which is the whole point of using:

You'll notice that we synchronized clocks along the guidestrip, per
spaceman's suggestion, with *electrical* signals.

to simultaneously measure where the ends are.

--
Timo

If ANY of you DHR's had a clue, you would know that the contraction is
dependent upon the difference in the time taken for a light pulse to
travel from the front to the rear of a train, comparing stationary and
moving.
Take AWAY the light, and there is F*A* left.......of "The Theory"

This is crap. In the discussion of how to measure the length of the
ovibert that's moving, you'll note that there is a camera *immediately
adjacent* to each end of the ovibert, and that when the ovibert is
*directly alongside* the pair of cameras, we take a picture of both
ends of the ovibert. There is *no light* traveling from one end of the
ovibert to the other to make this measurement. There is *no relative
delay* in the logging of the positions of the ovibert for this
measurement. I simply take a picture with multiple cameras
simultaneously, all of them positioned four inches from the marks on
the guidestrip and three inches from the passing ovibert.

[______________ovibert_______________] -->
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | marks on guidestrip
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
cameras



PD

.

Quantcast