phyllotaxis wrote: Wouldn't it be possible to load some light speed testing equipment onto a rocket and shoot it out into space, taking precise measurements at continuing points as it escapes our system? As in, emitter and receiver on platform.
Seems like a reasonable test of light propagation in different levels of "vacuum".... Seems to me that would put to rest much debate about the quality of vacuum at various distances from Sol....
Yes, and I think the results might surprise a few people. But being that those that control the funding do not want their theories upset, that experiment will not be performed until undertaken by a private backer. You can't even get them to but rarely admit that 99% of the universe is plasma and that plasma by definition is an electrically charged gas. They will instead explain to you how the quarks in a neutron are electrified particles, but that somehow what holds it together is color charge which they try to trick you into believing is not actually charge at all. This so they can declare the neutron to have no charge so likewise they can say space has no charge. Space is filled with magnetic fields, and there is no known way except through electrical currents to generate magnetic fields, but space is neutral. Go figure.
Lloyd
Re: Miles Mathis Interview
* Well, Nick beat me to mentioning the previous discussion of Mathis and Pi. But here it is again: http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8~. It's a good discussion of that issue, much better than what's been said on this thread about it. I think it gives pretty good answers to David et al. It's only 3 pages of posts, so it's readable. And they're largely relevant to the topic. I'm not good enough at logic or math etc to feel sure that Mathis is right or wrong about pi being 4 in kinematics, but what David lately said about it infecting many of Mathis' papers doesn't matter to me so far, as I don't think it's an issue in his UFT papers and many others. * As for c, if the universe started with only photons, the initial speed of photons would seem to have been much faster than at present. As photons began to form into electrons, protons, neutrons etc, which aggregate into atoms etc and localize, rather than zip around like photons, they may have slowed photons down quite a bit too. Does that sound plausible?
Aardwolf
Re: Miles Mathis Interview
sjw40364 wrote:
phyllotaxis wrote: Wouldn't it be possible to load some light speed testing equipment onto a rocket and shoot it out into space, taking precise measurements at continuing points as it escapes our system? As in, emitter and receiver on platform.
Seems like a reasonable test of light propagation in different levels of "vacuum".... Seems to me that would put to rest much debate about the quality of vacuum at various distances from Sol....
Yes, and I think the results might surprise a few people. But being that those that control the funding do not want their theories upset, that experiment will not be performed until undertaken by a private backer. You can't even get them to but rarely admit that 99% of the universe is plasma and that plasma by definition is an electrically charged gas. They will instead explain to you how the quarks in a neutron are electrified particles, but that somehow what holds it together is color charge which they try to trick you into believing is not actually charge at all. This so they can declare the neutron to have no charge so likewise they can say space has no charge. Space is filled with magnetic fields, and there is no known way except through electrical currents to generate magnetic fields, but space is neutral. Go figure.
But wouldn't they just say that c is constant and that there is something anomalous about the acceleration of the rocket...
David
Re: Miles Mathis Interview
Lloyd wrote: I'm not good enough at logic or math etc to feel sure that Mathis is right or wrong about pi being 4...
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." — Groucho Marx
davesmith_au
Re: Miles Mathis Interview
Now 13 pages long, I see no value in keeping this Miles Mathis topic alive. To derive the circumference of a circle by using (half) squares is, to say the least, unconventional in the extreme. To then redefine pi as a result ...
This thread will now be locked, please don't just start another in it's place. This has nothing to do with EU.
