| General > General Technical Chat |
| "Veritasium" (YT) - "The Big Misconception About Electricity" ? |
| << < (300/396) > >> |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: HuronKing on March 08, 2022, 01:00:02 am --- --- Quote from: aetherist on March 08, 2022, 12:29:10 am ---Einsteinist's added (tried to add) equivalence to Einstein's elevator gedanken in later years, to try to resurrect Einstein's canonical gedanken, but they failed, which i wont go into today. I am talking about the original gedanken, not the pathetic failed modern faux-elevator gedanken version. --- End quote --- So am I. And Einstein himself told us about the original thought-experiment and his realization of the equivalence between gravitational frames and accelerated frames. https://web.archive.org/web/20151222085312/http://inpac.ucsd.edu/students/courses/winter2012/physics2d/einsteinonrelativity.pdf It seems apparent you don't understand any description of the elevator experiment. --- End quote --- The elevator gedanken for equivalence was a different gedanken. It helped Einstein to develop his 1915 GTR. His bending of light elevator gedanken dates back some years before that. Modern Einsteinist's invoke a modification to the classic elevator gedanken. They insert a clock near the floor & a clock near the ceiling, & they invoke a postulate or something whereby the clocks tick at different rates, due to their different elevations, even tho both clocks are subject to the same acceleration in the elevator. Believe it or knot. What a disaster. Einstein never invoked thems silly clocks. --- Quote from: HuronKing on March 08, 2022, 01:00:02 am --- --- Quote ---Yes i am aware that according to Einstein light duznt bend near the Sun, it is spacetime that bends. --- End quote --- Then why are you asking idiotic questions about what general relativity says about a single photon in a gravitational field like it's some big 'gotcha' question if you're so aware of it? The answer is right there in the theory. |O --- End quote --- Show me where Einstein's theory accounts for the horizontality of the arrow. --- Quote from: HuronKing on March 08, 2022, 01:00:02 am --- --- Quote ---I am still working on my aetheric bending of light. I have a number of aetheric candidates that can give me the extra 0.87 arcsec that i need. But that would need the Einsteinian bending due to the nearness of mass to be 0.00 arcsec. It might indeed be 0.00 arcsec, if the Huyghen refraction in mass duznt apply to Einstein refraction near mass. --- End quote --- I'd wish you luck with proving that but the amount of luck you'd need would probably collapse into a black hole singularity. --- End quote --- No, i have a candidate for the extra 0.87 arcsec. It is that a photon has mass, in which case besides the photon getting a ride in the aether accelerating into the Sun, the photon also at the same time falls through the aether, due to its mass, like a particle, both giving 0.87 arcsec, adding to 1.75 arcsec. This is the aetheric theory that i came up with years ago, but then i decided that Einstein's slowing of light near mass (which is true) would explain the bending, but today i am starting to think that Einstein's invoking of Huyghens refraction (for light in mass) is not valid (for light near mass). Refraction in mass gives fringes (the starlight has different colours on the side nearer the Sun & on the side farther from the Sun)(a sort of rainbow effect), but Einstein's refraction near mass does not have such fringes (according to Shapiro). But there i go again. I mentioned the slowing of light. Silly me. Einstein tells us that light duznt slow, & it duznt bend, it is spacetime that bends etc. I keep forgetting. Light has only one speed. |
| penfold:
--- Quote from: aetherist on March 08, 2022, 12:53:51 am --- --- Quote from: penfold on March 07, 2022, 11:35:22 pm ---Why are the photons now arrows and what properties of the photons are the arrows showing? By what mechanism does either the inside or outside observer, observe those arrows? --- End quote --- I use arrows for photons to show the angles of the photons, ie the photons (arrows) remain horizontal at all times, but the apparent trajectory (for the inside observer) of the photons (ie of say their center points) has a downwardly curve. [...] --- End quote --- Where in relation to the photon's position does the arrow locate? What determines the direction of the arrow? There's a wave vector and 'something' tangental to the path we could call velocity... is it one of those? The apparent trajectory, velocity/path, is something that can be related back to the observer by observing a reflection of the beam, repeating the thought experiment enough times for enough points to resolve a trajectory. Side note: {But would the mirror necesarily need to be coplanar with any surface of the lift (translated: elevator)? and would it need to be moving with the same velocity profile as the lift?} Would the apparent discrepancy between elevator-time and photon's time result in an apparent change in wave-vector direction? --- Quote from: aetherist on March 08, 2022, 01:14:27 am ---Modern Einsteinist's invoke a [...] --- End quote --- I don't think I've ever met one (an Einsteinist) in person, I've no doubt there are some who exclusively follow the theories of Einstein. Actually, I don't think I "follow" any particular interpretation, professionally I use a reasonably fixed set of models and equations because they are well-validated within the environment in which they are used. In any other cases, rather than follow, I went off my on my own path kinda-sorta in the direction that somebody was gesturing, I think he was Poynting. |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: penfold on March 08, 2022, 08:39:34 am --- --- Quote from: aetherist on March 08, 2022, 12:53:51 am --- --- Quote from: penfold on March 07, 2022, 11:35:22 pm ---Why are the photons now arrows and what properties of the photons are the arrows showing? By what mechanism does either the inside or outside observer, observe those arrows? --- End quote --- I use arrows for photons to show the angles of the photons, ie the photons (arrows) remain horizontal at all times, but the apparent trajectory (for the inside observer) of the photons (ie of say their center points) has a downwardly curve. [...] --- End quote --- Where in relation to the photon's position does the arrow locate? What determines the direction of the arrow? There's a wave vector and 'something' tangental to the path we could call velocity... is it one of those? The apparent trajectory, velocity/path, is something that can be related back to the observer by observing a reflection of the beam, repeating the thought experiment enough times for enough points to resolve a trajectory. Side note: {But would the mirror necesarily need to be coplanar with any surface of the lift (translated: elevator)? and would it need to be moving with the same velocity profile as the lift?} Would the apparent discrepancy between elevator-time and photon's time result in an apparent change in wave-vector direction? --- Quote from: aetherist on March 08, 2022, 01:14:27 am ---Modern Einsteinist's invoke a [...] --- End quote --- I don't think I've ever met one (an Einsteinist) in person, I've no doubt there are some who exclusively follow the theories of Einstein. Actually, I don't think I "follow" any particular interpretation, professionally I use a reasonably fixed set of models and equations because they are well-validated within the environment in which they are used. In any other cases, rather than follow, I went off my on my own path kinda-sorta in the direction that somebody was gesturing, I think he was Poynting. --- End quote --- I imagine a photon as having a central helix. Here below is some wordage that i wrote a while ago. Today i might have to add a few words re my (recent) electons, ie electricity, ie photons that are hugging a conductor. A photon is not a wave, & it is not a particle, it is a quasi-particle. Photons, being the fundamental building block, make particles (eg electrons). Photons have a central/internal part (the central helix) & an external part (the photaeno). The central helix has a front end & a rear end, & is (possibly) 1 wavelength long. The wavelength is simply one turn of the helix (there is no wave). The central helix is an annihilation of aether. Annihilation of aether gives gravitational mass & inertial mass. The track of the annihilation forms a helix. The helical annihilation moves axially throo the aether at the speed of light c, & along its helical track at more than c. Photaenos radiate out (to infinity) from the central helix. Photaenos annihilate aether, hence they have gravitational mass & inertial mass. Photaenos include a vibration (excitation) of the aether. Photaenos propagate outwards throo the aether at perhaps 5c in the near field (approx 2 m) & perhaps c in the far field (wolfgang g gasser). https://www.electronicspoint.com/forums/threads/experimental-evidence-for-v-c-in-case-of-coulomb-interaction.168813/ Photaenos radiate from fixed locations in the aether, ie from fixed locations along the central helix. Photaenos do not have a sideways velocity in the aether, ie each photaeno is shed from the central helix as the rear end of the central helix passes. In a free photon every photaeno is initially attached to the central helix, & later it detaches. In a confined photon the central helix has formed a continuous loop, in which case the photaenos do not detach (the central helix has no rear end). Electrons & other elementary particle are confined photons. Photaenos give us charge fields & electromagnetic fields. An attached photaeno gives a high field strength, an unattached photaeno gives a weaker field. Hence a free photon has 3 parts, the central helix, the attached photaenos, & the unattached photaenos. A confined photon has 2 parts, it has no unattached photaenos. Man-made radio signals are carried by photaenos, they are not carried by photons. A photon with a (natural) 10 mm wavelength (the length of its central helix), is a different animal to a radio wave with a (forced) 10 mm wavelength (which has no central helix). Free photons are slowed by the nearness of mass (confined photons), as suggested/proven by Shapiro (Shapiro Delay). Shapiro Delay is due to the photaenos (from the free photon)(& from the confined photon) fighting for the limited use of the aether. Fighting/congestion slows the photaenos & this slowing feeds back to the central helix, slowing the central helix. I call this slowing "photaeno drag". It contributes to the bending of light. It gives us diffraction near an edge. Photaeno drag is very strong inside mass (air water glass). It gives us refraction, & reflexion. I would like to add a comment re my Excel confirmation of Einstein's bending of light passing the Sun. My Excel is the only (as far as i know) proper confirmation of Einstein's bending in history. It is based on Einstein's postulates. The equations derived from Einstein's postulates are not a first rate confirmation, in that they rely on maths, ie they introduce other postulates (of a mathematical kind). The equations are a second rate confirmation. If u have not got the time to carry out thousands of calculations, following the light, inch by inch, & then add, then u will need to use the usual (second rate) short cut of deriving an equation. My Excel is a first rate confirmation. Just saying (hero). |
| penfold:
--- Quote from: aetherist on March 08, 2022, 10:08:27 pm ---[...] I would like to add a comment re my Excel confirmation of Einstein's bending of light passing the Sun. My Excel is the only (as far as i know) proper confirmation of Einstein's bending in history. It is based on Einstein's postulates. The equations derived from Einstein's postulates are not a first rate confirmation, in that they rely on maths, ie they introduce other postulates (of a mathematical kind). The equations are a second rate confirmation. If u have not got the time to carry out thousands of calculations, following the light, inch by inch, & then add, then u will need to use the usual (second rate) short cut of deriving an equation. My Excel is a first rate confirmation. Just saying (hero). --- End quote --- You are mixing and matching concepts from your theory in there with the previous thought experiment, so it doesn't disprove anything there, it just says that the two are not compatible. I'm curious though as to what difference an iterative integration should have when compared with an analytical one if the expressions exist in excel, and the iteration is done in excel then I don't see why an analytical solution couldn't produce the exact result, i.e. minimum rounding error. Would you consider sharing the spreadsheet? I'm intrigued if nothing else, doesn't matter if it's undocumented or messy, I can guarantee I've worked with far worse and deliberately obfuscated spreadsheets. |
| adx:
--- Quote from: aetherist on March 08, 2022, 10:08:27 pm ---Photaenos propagate outwards throo the aether at perhaps 5c in the near field (approx 2 m) & perhaps c in the far field (wolfgang g gasser). https://www.electronicspoint.com/forums/threads/experimental-evidence-for-v-c-in-case-of-coulomb-interaction.168813/ --- End quote --- We were taught 3c 'nearnuff', decades ago, at university. It was an interesting observation on near vs far field propagation, and how simplistic thoughts of things propagating through space can lead one astray. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |