Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Geryllax Vu

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    65

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by Geryllax Vu

  1. Geryllax Vu
    Under the Special Theory of Relativity, the units of time are to be measured in terms of a triangle formed by a reflected light bean. This gives rise to the effect of time dilation appearing between an observer in motion and an observer at relative rest. The phenomenon of time dilation is, however, indiscernible for the observer who shares in the motion.
    If a sound wave is used to measure the unit of time, the time dilation assumes a cloak of invisibility. The dilation appears only slightly when the sound source is in motion (v << c). So, while measuring a unit of time on a clock, across reference frames, is impossible for a light beam, it is well within the grasp of a sound wave. An observer in motion will totally agree with an observer at relative rest.
    The formulae of c = L / t or t = L / c, is the simplest form of the Newtonian law, or equation of motion in an inertial reference frame attached to the train, by the principle of relativity. A comparison with the result of my thought experiment yields an unmasking of length contraction. The time of travel of the sound wave down the length of the train car, L, if it were at rest, can be read from the length specifications, and the known speed of sound waves c.
    The observer on board the train would anticipate the measured time can be solved for by using algebra. But, if the train is in motion (forward), then the time measured will be different from this time: t = L - vt / c, (with t = t), or t = L / (c + v), due to the forward motion of the train car at the velocity, v. And thus the time that the sound wave has taken while traveling, as interpreted by the observer, will be shorter than the time of travel for the sound wave down the train car, if it were at rest.
    The setup of my thought experiment uses a single clock so that no synchronization is necessary. This has been put forward as a proof for supporting STR. In most examples to illustrate STR, it is put forward that the observer at rest has to use two clocks for two events that occur at different locations in space.
    However in my hypothesis, there is only one clock, and only one observer within the train reference frame; thus doing an end run around synchronization; it is not a limitation for my hypothesis. I propose that the answer the train car observer measures is identical to that of an observer on the platform, without any sort of communication going on between the two.
    This shakes the appearance and reality of Relativity. An axiomatic statement that these two observers, one at rest one in motion, will measure two different times and velocities for the same event, is at the heart of Relativity. But my setup has done precisely that.
    Both the train observer and the platform observer will claim the same, identical formula for the motion of the train car. This is the same formula found by the platform observer by the Galilean transformation. Units of time cannot be measured by light waves across reference frames, to get a single common value; but it can be measured thusly by sound waves, under easily met conditions.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
  2. Geryllax Vu
    Now I switch to a different venue for my thought experiment. It will involve two automobiles traveling down a smooth straight level section of turnpike. Each auto will set their cruise controls at a constant velocity, v, which they have agreed upon beforehand. Each driver has fully operational digital clocks, annoyingly loud horns, and bright halogen lights on board. It is dusk on a clear windless day.
    As the convoy (a lead auto and a following auto) makes its way down the road, the pair are rolling in tandem with each other; neither accelerating, nor decelerating, relative to one another. They can be regarded as at rest relative to one other. However, the air is at rest relative to both autos as they are moving down the road (the air and road are both at rest relative to the autos).
    So to check that they are a safe distance, L, apart (stopping distance at this speed) the driver of the following auto conjures up a test. She makes a hands free cell phone call to the driver in the lead car. When he answers she tells him her plan.
    On a windless day they are rolling down the turnpike in tandem, thus they at rest relative to each other; but at the same time, they are in motion, at the same velocity, relative to the road and air. She proposes to flash her headlights as a signal to her comrade‘s auto. When he sees the light signal, he is to honk his horn. At the same that she flashes her lights, she starts her digital clock. Thusly, the time she measures, since the light signal is effectively instantaneous, will be for the horn sound to return to her:
    The distance they are apart will not be L = ct, but rather L = ct + vt, where v is the velocity of the tandem relative to the road and still air (c is the velocity of sound). They will begin at the distance L apart, then her auto and the sound pulse will meet somewhere within L by algebra. This reflects the forward motion of her vehicle at the same time as the sound wave is traveling rearwards. This accounts for all the variables and determines the distance they are apart.
    The pair travels on further, after checking their safe distance. Now, towards the end of their trip, they have reached the familiar environs near the exit for her town. He speeds up to a new constant velocity, u, to make time without risk of losing her. At this new velocity, he gradually pulls away from her. He will travel on to the next town alone. Then, she imagines a continuance for their little thought experiment.
    As he is gradually separating, she realizes that the source (he) and the receiver (she) are no longer in tandem, now a Doppler effect appears because they are no longer traveling at the same speed. An aspect of Doppler (sound waves through air) is that when the source approaches the receiver, there is a slight mathematical difference than when the receiver approaches the source (introducing a sort of wind in either reference frame).
    So if she makes the measurement of the change in frequency from her friend’s auto horn while he gradually separates from her, then she will find the source sound wave to have apparently changed frequency. She knows the frequency of the horn from when the autos are at rest relative to each other.
    In other words she can determine the frequency of the sound of the auto horn while the autos are rolling in tandem (they are at rest relative to each other but moving at the same velocity relative to the air, so ff = f0 ). She can now discern whether she is in motion relative to the air, earth and his auto (which she thinks could be at rest); or whether the air (wind) , earth and his auto are in motion while she is at rest.
    This can seen by a comparison of the two formulas that fit these two scenarios (the different frequencies can be used to solve for using their different velocities); if the frequency she measures is one value of f then she concludes that she is moving; if the frequency has some other value f, then she concludes she is at rest:
    ♦ f = [ c / (c + vs)] f0
    ♦ f = [(c + vr ) / c] f0
    These formulae are clearly different, just by appearance. Therein, the nature of her motion is revealed. Either she is stationary, with the medium in motion; or she is in motion, with the medium being stationary. She has a mathematical means of determining this.
    She can distinguish, by her thought experiment, whether the autos are in motion with the Earth stationary; or the autos are stationary, with the Earth in motion. This is contrary to the principles of relativity which state that both situations are equivalent, or equally valid descriptions of her motion, thus they are interchangeable in a way. But her thought experiment shows that this is unsound.
    http://en.wikipedia..../Doppler_effect
    http://gerrybharris.blogspot.com/
  3. Geryllax Vu
    -1632, Galileo proposed his thought experiment, called “Galileo’s Ship“:
    “…That is why I said you should be below decks; for if this took place above in the open air, which would not follow the course of the ship, more or less noticeable differences would be seen in some of the noted effects…”
    -This is the point which I wish to drive my shoulder into. Focusing on the air as a medium for the transmission of sound waves, I want to transmutate these noticeable differences into mathematically measurable phenomena.
    -In Galileo’s Ship once again:
    “…have the ship proceed with any speed you like, so long as the motion is uniform and not fluctuating this way and that, you discover not the least change in all the effects named, nor could you tell from any of them whether the ship was moving or standing still…”
    -It is this not being able to tell whether the ship is moving, or at rest, which is the critical point. This is the foundation of Galilean invariance, or his principle of relativity. It is reiterated by Newton, and appears in the axioms of Einstein; no experiment can be done to detect absolute motion. The laws of physics are the same from the point of view from a reference frame, or within the reference frame.
    -However, it has already been observed by scientists that sound waves violate this invariance, or relativity. Sound waves seem to cross this wall of separation between two reference frames, one at rest and one in relative motion (at a constant velocity). An observer within the ship cabin, shares the motion of the ship, along with the air molecules. This observer is at rest within the ship’s reference frame. The laws of physics take on their simplest form.
    -An observer on the shore sees the ship observer and air molecules following the translatory motion of the ship as it travels through the water. This shore observer factors this translation into a formula, but realizes that he cannot communicate any of this mathematical information to the ship observer.
    -If the cabin observer moved to the open air of the main deck, I think she would have a different set of experiences than she had had below decks. If a sailor is set to ring a bell at the aft end of the ship, then the sound waves would travel to the fore end of the ship where the ship observer could be positioned. The fore and aft positions are at rest relative to each other; but are moving in tandem relative to the still air. This is a critical point; so she proposes to perform a thought experiment.
    -If she were to send a light signal -- a lantern maybe -- to a sailor at the bell, then this sailor would ring the bell (disregarding reaction times). This light signal would effectively be instantaneous over this short distance, D. If she started her chronometer at this exact same moment, then she would measure the time, t1, for the sound wave to return to her. However, because the ship is in translatory motion, with the air at rest (windless day), then the formula she would use is not t = D / c, as below decks; instead, she would use t1 = (D - vt1) / c in the open still air.
    -This would be identical in form to the shore observer’s mathematics (from the Michelson-Morley experiment to detect the Aether). He would simply factor in the translatory motion of the ship in his calculations. The ship observer can safely assume that, because she knows of the violation of invariance by sound waves, that the time she measures would be associated with the formula that includes the ship’s velocity, v. This unknown can then be solved for.
    -This counterclaims the principles of relativity. A certain kind of motion is revealed; it is somewhere between absolute and relative motion. This intermediary motion spins silken threads between reference frames.
    -It seems counterintuitive that the mere addition of four solid walls and the introduction of very slow sound waves can produce more insight into scientific phenomena than super fast light waves. This may be more Philosophy than Physics; what rides on a narrow gauge rail, is our perception of reality.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo's_ship
  4. Geryllax Vu
    -An Echo measured at the Grand Canyon fits the formula t = [2L] / c. But this is only valid in light of the fact that a thin layer of air molecules (atmosphere / medium) is being dragged by the surface of the Earth (like a dimpled golf ball) as it hurtles through interstellar space. If this layer were at rest relative to the Earth, then this would allow a new definition of relativity to emerge based on a new Echo formula:
    ♦ T = [(L - vt1) / c] + [(L + vt2) / c ] = [2Lc] / (c²-v²)
    -This Echo formula is the key element of my hypothesis. It comes from the Michelson-Morley interferometer experiment to detect the Aether. The source of the wave and the reflection from a distant object are at rest relative to each other; but the tandem they form is in motion relative to the medium. This is the underlying idea that I am trying to exploit in this hypothesis.
  5. Geryllax Vu
    -I am mainly using two algebra word problem concepts as the mathematical framework for my hypothesis: meeting and overtaking. That is, the aft vertical pole is meeting the sound wave - air at rest, the train is moving forward; or the aft vertical pole is overtaking the sound wave - air at rest, the train is moving in reverse.
    -In the reference frame of the moving flatbed train car, the aft pole, the observer and her clock are either overtaking or meeting the fore pole of the train car, depending on whether the train is moving towards or away from the sound emitter. But the aft pole and the observer will never reach the fore pole because they are moving in tandem (except in a train wreck!!!).
    -At the same time, on a windless day, the air molecules (medium) are in another reference frame (along with another observer and the platform), which is at rest relative to the first reference frame. However this other observer, and the station platform, and this other reference frame are not needed for my calculations. The idea that this other observer gets a similar result to the observer within the flatbed reference frame is what leads me to believe that I have found a new state of motion.
    -The arrangement of the experimental apparatus is that, affixed to the aft pole is a light emitter and a sound sensor. There is also a single clock and a single observer seated at this position. Affixed to the fore pole, is a light sensor and a sound emitter whose purpose is to send a sound wave back towards the original starting position back at the aft pole.
    -To set up the algebra word problem, I assign letters to the given knowns and unknowns. The speed of sound is to be represented by c; the speed of the train is to be represented by v; the length of the flatbed is to be represented by L; and the time elapsed while the experiment is conducted is to be represented by t. The next step is to find the equation expressing the relationship amongst the constants and variables.
    -For the equation expressing the meeting aspect of this word problem, I imagine that as the train is moving forward relative to the arrangement of the apparatus, the aft pole will meet the sound wave traveling back toward the pole through the air. This is somewhere within the distance of the starting positions of the aft pole and sound emitter at the instant when the sound is emitted.
    ♦ ct = L - vt
    ♦ ct + vt = L
    ♦ t = L / (c + v)
    -To continue, for the equation expressing the overtaking aspect of this word problem, I imagine that as the train is going in reverse relative to the arrangement of the apparatus, the sound wave will overtake the aft pole somewhere beyond the distance that they are originally apart. Thusly, at the same time the aft pole is moving away from the sound.
    ♦ ct = L + vt
    ♦ ct - vt = L
    ♦ t = L / (c - v)
    -Either of these two equations can be solved for v (unknown), the velocity of the train. All the other values (knowns) can be found from the experiment. Taken together, they are identical to the formula from the Michelson-Morley experiment to detect the aether. So, if they are added, the resulting formula can also be solved for v:
    ♦ T = [L / (c + v)] + [L / (c - v)] = [2Lc] / (c²-v²)
    -Due to the idea that the poles are at rest relative to each other, but moving in tandem relative to the medium, creates the scenario that I can algebraically exploit to create this alternative form of echo. Since sound waves are different from light waves, both by Einstein and by Galileo, I believe I have found a new interpretation of motion.
  6. Geryllax Vu
    -Suppose a long train with a caboose travels down a level section of track at a constant velocity, v. There is an observer in the caboose and an engineer in the engine car. It is a windless day. This observer may ask: What is the speed of the train relative to the air, or a nearby platform (both at rest relative to train)?
    -She has a light source (lantern, maybe) to send a signal to the engine car and engineer. The light signal is effectively instantaneous. He blows the whistle when he receives the signal (disregard reaction time). If she starts the clock when she sends the light signal, then she can measure the time, t, for her to hear the returning sound (speed of sound, c) signal.
    -During the same time that the train is in forward motion, the whistle sound is in rearward motion. She speculates that she will meet the sound wave somewhere within the distance, D, from the engine to the caboose. By algebra:
    ♦ ct = D - vt (t = t)
    -Is she correct that she can find the velocity, v, of the train?
  7. Geryllax Vu
    -A common thought experiment by Einstein often used to help explain his concept of sim​ultaneity involves a train car and a nearby station platform. If lightning strikes the fore and aft ends of a moving train car at the same time, then a definition of simultaneity emerges.
    -Having grown up in the American Midwest, thunderstorms are a common occurrence. A story that weathercasters often tell is that when a lightning bolt is observed some distance away, then if the time is counted until the thunder reaches the observer, he or she can tell how far away the lightning strike occurred. So using this principle, I think a new type of simultaneity can be defined.
    -Instead of focusing on the scorch marks left by the lightning strike on the train car, or left on the platform, I will concentrate on the audible thunder clap that occurs at the same time as the lightning strike.
    -At the central location of the train car is a single observer, with a single clock, a single sound receiver, a single light sensor. They are all at rest relative to each other within the single reference frame attached to the moving train car.
    -The light from the lightning reaches the central location (a distance L from either end) effectively instantaneously; and thus by definition simultaneously. The observer starts the clock when the light arrives. The light and sound start at the same time, but the sounds will arrive at the central location some time later, possibly at different times. Then, if it can be determined that the sounds were simultaneous, then this leads to the conclusion that the lightening strikes were simultaneous
    -If she sees that the thunder sound arrives at different times she can assume that either the train car is at rest and the lightning did not strike simultaneously; or the train car is in motion, and the lightning strikes were simultaneous.
    -Now the question becomes more philosophy than physics. She has in her mind that it is a windless day, so the air is not moving (nor the platform). So this leaves the only philosophically viable option available to her is that the train is in motion. She then tries to imagine what mathematical means can she use to determine the value of this velocity. Her friend is waiting on the platform (there is a reference frame at rest attached to it) but she will not consult with him.
    -So she adds together the arrival times from the fore and aft ends, which are L / (c-v) and L / (c+v) in non-relativistic terms for sound (not [L / c] + [L / c], since the speed of sound is much less than the speed of light). This becomes [2Lc] / (c²-v²) which leads to her being able to find the velocity of the train, v.
    -Once having this value she can make the comparison and correction, and make a call to the engineer to verify the magnitude and direction of this velocity. So she has found the velocity of the train, and also whether the lightning strikes were simultaneous, completely from within the reference frame attached to the moving train car.
    http://en.wikipedia....of_simultaneity
  8. Geryllax Vu
    -Suppose a hi-speed train is traveling down a long level section of track at a constant velocity, v. It is a windless day. The engineer at the engine decides to blow the whistle at some particular time. An observer in the caboose, and another observer on the train station platform may feel compelled to ask, what is the speed of the train. Can either or both find the speed of the train based only on the blast (sound) of the train whistle?
    -The observer on the caboose might construct her algebra problem like this; she knows the distance, D, from the whistle to the caboose from the known train specifications. But since she also knows that the train is moving with the constant velocity v, the train must meet the sound pulse from the whistle somewhere within the distance between the caboose and the whistle (the whistle and the caboose are at rest relative to each other, hopefully). So she sets up her algebraic equation as follows:
    :Envy: cst = D - vt
    Where cs, is the speed of sound in air, and both times, t, are equal. Rearranging this equation:
    D = cst + vt
    D = t(cs + v)
    [D /t] = (cs + v)
    [D/t] - cs = v
    -So, she imagines if she sends a very fast signal (such as a light signal - virtually instantaneous) to the whistle, starts a clock by her side when she sends the signal, then measures the time until she hears the whistle blast. She should be able to find the velocity of the train, v, from the above equation.
    -On the other hand, the observer on the platform hears this sound pulse from the whistle at the same time. By starting a clock as he hears the first wave front, and then timing the time difference of the arrival of the second sound wave front, he can find the wavelength of the sound as the train approaches him at that instant:
    :Envy: λf = cst
    But by Doppler, the wavelength in front of the moving sound source also equals:
    :Envy: λf = (cs - v) / ƒ0
    He knows the frequency, ƒ0, of the whistle from the train specifications, so by substitution, he can solve for the velocity of the train, v:
    :Envy: v = cs - [(λf)(ƒ0)]
    -If the two observers measure the same whistle blast simultaneously, then will they find the same value for v, the velocity of the train?
    http://en.wikipedia..../Doppler_effect
  9. Geryllax Vu
    -In the book by Galileo Galilei, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, he outlines a thought experiment that is to take place on a typical wooden ship of his time. This experiment illustrates a principle of projectiles in motion and describes the hidden nature of forces and motion. It introduces his principle of relativity that has come down to us as Einstein’s postulate of absolute motion from his Special Relativity Theory (STR).
    -Quotes from the book:
    "…Shut yourself up with some friend in the main cabin below decks on some large ship, and have with you there some flies, butterflies, and other small flying animals…"
    "…have the ship proceed with any speed, so long as the motion is uniform and not fluctuating this way and that. You will discover not the least change in all the effects named, nor could you tell from any of them whether the ship was moving or standing still…"
    "…This is why you should be below decks; for if this took place in the open air, which would not follow the course of the ship, more or less noticeable differences would be seen in some of the effects noted…"
    -This is the point that I am trying to drive my shoulder into. Galileo indicates that if his ship experiment is conducted above decks, then the air would have a negligible effect on the outcome. I think my thought experiment is trying to turn this minor observable effect into an experimentally measurable phenomenon.
    -In so doing, I think a new state of motion is defined. It is not absolute motion, it is not relative motion, but is an intermediary state of motion that crosses the line of unobserveable information between reference frames.
    -This involves the formula from the Michelson-Morley experiment seeking to detect the aether. By taking apart the component parts of this formula, and combining them with the results of data from measurements, a new perspective of the formula can be obtained. This defines a new state of physical motion. The speed of sound, c is so much less than the speed of light, c; I don’t think that there will be any undue influence by Relativistic effects.
    http://en.wikipedia....ileo's_ship
  10. Geryllax Vu
    -So to continue my thought of disentangling reference frames, I think this is an important step in my hypothesis because it allows a mathematical transformation between the flatbed train car and the air / medium. Either the air molecules are in motion while the flatbed is at rest, or the flatbed is in motion with the air molecules at rest (e.g., on a windless day). But I can choose what type of day and conditions under which I want to conduct the thought experiment, beforehand.
    -In an enclosed train car the observer inside, the air molecules, and the walls are all in the same reference frame. An observer at rest on a nearby station platform is in a different reference frame. What I want to accomplish is a shifting of objects from one reference frame to another, so that I can counterclaim Einstein’s absolute motion postulate. In other words find a way to determine the velocity, v from within the train car’s reference frame.
    -By switching to a flat bed train car I can make this shifting from one reference frame to another. In addition, adding a single clock to the flatbed train I can measure the time that the observer (train in motion, observer and platform at rest) on the platform measures. Thus, sort of mixing reference frames.
    -If the conditions of the flat bed train car experiment are either one of those that I mentioned before, then the formula for total travel time, T, of an echo is:
    :Envy: T = {[L + vt1] / c}+ {[L-vt2] / c} = {L / (c-v)} + {L / (c+v)}
    -As an example, consider a long train consisting of an engine with a whistle, some train cars, and a caboose. It is a windless day. If the whistle is blown at the engine on the moving train, then an observer on the stationary platform up ahead of the train whistle, will hear the sound waves with an altered wavelength and frequency due to the Doppler Effect. The source is in motion while the receiver is at rest.
    -However, an observer in the caboose will not experience this alteration due to Doppler because the caboose is at rest relative to the engine/whistle (the compression and rarefaction of the sound waves occurs out of the view of the observer). The engine and caboose are moving in tandem (except if the train is crashing into something) down the track.
    -By taking just the part of the wave pulse (velocity, c,) going back towards the caboose, on a windless day, with the train car in motion:
    :Envy: t1 = [L - vt1] / c (t1 = t1 , or t2 = t2 ,is a key point)
    -This is the phenomenon I wish to exploit. With a single clock, the observer in the caboose would conjecture that the length/distance that he or she is timing is:
    :Envy: L - vt1, not L
    -This can be solved for the velocity, v (absolute motion of entire train).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_reference
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_effect
  11. Geryllax Vu
    -Galilean Invariance, and its violation by waves, is a critical concept to my hypothesis. I plan to exploit this phenomenon as a means to take Einstein’s Relativity beyond the speed of light. If I am successful in coming up with a new definition of absolute motion and simultaneity, time travel may be on the horizon.
    -The idea of invariance involves a graphic (coordinates and axes) relationship between reference frames. These axes and coordinates are used as a mathematical means of representing reality. In any reference frame, waves exhibit their constant velocity nature.
    -However which is more akin to the reality we spend our daily lives in, Einstein’s reality or Galileo’s reality? Both use reference frames and the idea that waves (sound and light) violate invariance; but which is closer to the truth?
    -One day, as I was exploring the Echo formula, 2L = ct , I finally realized that the Earth drags a thin layer of atmosphere on its surface, like a golf ball, along with it as it hurtles through space. This causes the air / medium through which a sound travels to produce an Echo that may reverberate off a distant wall, and then return. While the earth is moving the air / medium is also moving with the same velocity (as well as any solid object affixed to the Earth).
    -This scenario makes the formula 2L = ct always work; this is what I mean by invariance. No matter what reference frame you are in the laws of mechanics will yield the same answer even if the two observers are in different reference frames, witness different velocities and distances, but clock the same times for an object in motion. If I can devise an experiment which disengages the motion of the air from the motion of the object, then a different formula arises for an “Echo”.
    -I pull this new formula for an Echo from the Michelson-Morley experiment and the single arm of the interferometer parallel to the objects motion. It involves the time for a wave traveling in one direction and being reflected back to its original starting point, in essence an echo.
    -The formula for this transmitted wave and reflected wave (sound or light) is the following when the source and receiver (reflective object) are at rest relative to each other, but in motion, as a tandem, relative to the air / medium:
    T = [L / (c-v)] + [L / (c+v)] = L {[1 / (c-v)] + [1 / (c+v)]} = [2Lc] / (c²-v²)
    not t = 2L / c
    -This new application of the M&M formula can be solved algebraically for the velocity, v, the absolute motion of the object.
    http://en.wikipedia....lean_invariance
  13. Geryllax Vu
    My journey into the realm of Relativity (Einstein, Newton, Galileo, et. al.) began with a simple question:
    Can the speed of sound,c, be substituted for speed of light,c, in the Michelson-Morley interferometer formula?
    That is, T = L /(c-v) + L /(c+v). It turns out that the answer (after my online investigations) is yes. The symbol,c, is applied
    to both types of waves. While c as the speed for light is 300,000 km /sec , and c as the speed for sound is approx. 300 m /sec.
    Additionally, the violation of Galilean invariance by all waves leads to my use of this formula for an "echo"; not T = [2L] / c .
    From this I hope to derive new definitions of absolute motion and simultaneity, with experiments using sound instead of light.
    This will be contrary to Einstein's Relativity Postulates. In other words by finding time,T, by means of a single clock, then I can
    algebraically rearrange the above mentioned formula to find v, the velocity or the absolute motion of an object.
    For additional details on this topic, see my posts:
    http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/161871-michelson-morley-experiment-speed-of-speed-c/
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.