Prev: The pointing out of black hole failure
Next: Electron and proton attraction by opposite charge
From: cosmojoe on 4 May 2010 18:15
Luminiferous Ether by Joel Webb

Utilizing a Michelson type interferometer w, I was able to detect
luminiferous ether over a one month period of observation.
On the evening of March 15th I observed these fringes to be moving
to the left for about ten minutes, and then slowly change direction, as
though being some kind of fluid, and then begin to drift to right for
another ten minutes.
Temperature variations were taken into account, the severest
coefficient for expansion occurring across the grain, and comes to 61.4
x 10-6 change in length per degree Centigrade at room temperature.
Given that that the total round trip lap for either interferometer beam
comes to 24" (each leg being 12"), one could expect a change of
length of:

Change in beam length = 61.4 x 10-6 x 24 = 1.47 x 10-3 inches.

In relationship to the light waves traveling through the
interferometer, which are from a green laser pointer of wavelength 532
Nm, or, 0.00000532 meters, only about seven fringes would fit inside a
linear change in wood grain of 1.47 x 10-3 inches, and would be unable
to produce appreciable fringe movement, particularly if the wood
associated with each beam should change the same, which they most likely
would do.
Valid measurements were plotted yielding these results.
The battery of red vectors (image is available at zyx2.org)
directed towards our galactic center, indicates that the field of
luminiferous ether is being drawn into the galactic center, or at least
in its direction at the location of the interferometer.
The blue vectors show our tangential motion towards 61 Cygni due to
galactic rotation.

Interferometer Construction, Set-up and Operation

This experiment is being performed at the time, date and location
shown utilizing an interferometer with two equal length beams of 12",
placed at right angles to each other.
The north-south beam is a reference beam denoted as X, the other,
denoted as Y, is aimed east to the horizon. The apparatus is locked
down and does not rotate; utilizing the earth's rotation instead. Due
east is always the aiming direction.
During March, the orbital progress of the earth and moon around the
sun is in line with the Cygnus-Orion axis.
On this axis, the apparatus will measure motion based upon two
motions: that of the sun's motion of 150 miles/sec (m/s) towards Cygnus
(away from Orion) and the earth's orbit around the sun at 18.5 m/s.
During other months, this condition is not true.
Both beams of light are projected slightly offset (normal in
achieving interference fringes) with the X beam stationed to the right
of the Y beam, which is rechecked at the conclusion of each run.
A fringe count rate is determined by dividing the number of fringes
observed passing a screen marker by the duration of the run.
The moving fringes represent the change of phase between the two
beams of light derived from a single green laser, not the motion of the
apparatus through the field, though such phase variation is directly
attributable to this motion.
The movement of the fringes may be either in the direction of the X
beam spot, or the Y beam spot, as observed, though it has not been
determined as to why.
Perhaps one of you has an explanation for this.
As another optical curio, on a rather muggy and drizzly evening,
secondary fringes were seen moving in the opposite direction to the
primary fringes I normally take account, and at a much higher rate of
passage. I think that it was some sort of optical reflection, nicely
magnifying the sensitivity of the apparatus.
Keep in mind that the earth's orbit component is also maximum at
noonday and at midnight, at this time of year, near the vernal equinox,
and though quite small at 18.5 m/s compared to the galactic rotation
component, somewhere around 150 m/s, they remain additive.
As convention in this study, galactic spin as viewed from the
galactic north pole (considered to be south by astronomers) is
clockwise, and considered to be positive motion,in contrast to the
earth's counterclockwise orbital and rotational spins, both considered
as negative in this accord. All poles, be they galactic, solar or earth
are aligned the same, though somewhat tilted to each other.
The earth's rotation at this site's latitude is -0.138 m/s;
contributing very little to these results. However, earth orbital data
should be included in these calculations: (150+18.5) m/s for daytime
observations and (150-18.5) m/s for nocturnal observations. March only.

Conclusion

The theory of relativity developed by Albert Einstein would
therefor be incorrect in its premise.
In light of this revelation, modern scientists should go back and
review older experiments predicating current theories incorporated into
the Standard Model, such as Hubble red-shift, Thomas Van Flandern's
lunar occultation observations and the water drop gedanken of Democritus.
In the case of the red-shift, there are two ways to view this, one
of which, hardly considered, would be the reverse perception that
material things, ourselves, our earth and our instruments are becoming
smaller in time, giving the impression that other celestial objects are
moving away from us.
If this were to be the case, the problem of old-matter associated
with Sir Fred Hoyle's steady-state cosmological model might be
eliminated altogether entirely.
One interpretation of Thomas Van Flandern's lunar occultation
observations supports the notion that both the earth and moon, all
material objects for that matter, might be getting smaller, giving the
impression that the earth-moon orbit is enlarging, as Van Flandern
alternatively concludes.
Today's expenditures on high-energy particle colliders finds its
premise on the older notions of atomism, going back to Democritus, who
supposed, once identifying the smallest extant form of water possible,
the atomoi, many such atomois making up a greater body of water would be
separated by some distance apart. When asked by his compatriots what
this interstitial medium was, he said that it was non-existence,
equivalent to empty space or
nothing.
Under strict rules of logic, the absence of separation, directly
implies touching, which ought to relegate the concept of atomism into
nonsense, something again, modern science should review.

What is luminiferous ether?

Luminiferous ether comprises four fundamental forms. These forms
exist because their probability of existence is unity (1.0).
The principle form is unbounded space as substance, rather than
nothing, as originally supposed by classical science, nor an imaginary
continuum as supposed by post classical science. It is not matter, such
as dark matter, nor a fluid as advocated towards the close of classical
physics, and much earlier by Rene Descartes. I commonly refer to this
form as an infinite volume.
The other three forms are a point, a line and a surface. Though
both the point and the line are virtually inert, whereas a field of
surface abounds in interaction, each is studied because of their similar
behaviors.
For example, two points imbedded within an infinite volume, may
collide, resulting in a random exchange in association between form and
motion. This event, called interchange, produces nothing.
Accordingly, two surfaces imbedded within an infinite volume may
collide, also resulting in interchange between them, yielding a modest
variety of interactive behaviors, the most significant being the Induced
Displacement Due to Interchange (IDDI).
IDDI is the premise for all forces-at-a-distance, such as
gravitation, magnetism, weak and strong forces, electrostatic forces and
both attractive and repulsive nuclear range
forces.
IDDI also contributes to universal inertia and momentum, as well as
time, time not being fundamental nor intrinsically real.
Since a point, a line and a surface are not substance, but only
form, they cannot exist if not in the presence of the substance of an
infinite volume; an infinite volume predicating their presence.

For more on this subject, go here.
From: BURT on 4 May 2010 18:20
On May 4, 3:15 pm, cosmojoe <cosmo...(a)hawaiiantel.net> wrote:
> Luminiferous Ether by Joel Webb
>
>      Utilizing a Michelson type interferometer w, I was able to detect
> luminiferous ether over  a one month period of observation.
>      On the evening of March 15th I observed these fringes to be moving
> to the left for about ten minutes, and then slowly change direction, as
> though being some kind of fluid, and then begin to drift to right for
> another ten minutes.
>      Temperature variations were taken into account, the severest
> coefficient for expansion occurring across the grain, and comes to 61.4
> x 10-6 change in length per degree Centigrade at room temperature.
> Given that that the total round trip lap for either interferometer beam
> comes to 24" (each leg being 12"), one could expect a change of
> length of:
>
>       Change in beam length = 61.4 x 10-6 x 24 = 1.47 x 10-3 inches.
>
>      In relationship to the light waves traveling through the
> interferometer, which are from a green laser pointer of wavelength 532
> Nm, or, 0.00000532 meters, only about seven fringes would fit inside a
> linear change in wood grain of 1.47 x 10-3 inches, and would be unable
> to produce appreciable fringe movement, particularly if the wood
> associated with each beam should change the same, which they most likely
> would do.
>      Valid measurements were plotted yielding these results.
>      The battery of red vectors (image is available at zyx2.org)
> directed towards our galactic center, indicates that the field of
> luminiferous ether is being drawn into the galactic center, or at least
> in its direction at the location of the interferometer.
>      The blue vectors show our tangential motion towards 61 Cygni due to
> galactic rotation.
>
> Interferometer Construction, Set-up and Operation
>
>      This experiment is being performed at the time, date and location
> shown utilizing an interferometer with two equal length beams of 12",
> placed at right angles to each other.
>   The north-south beam is a reference beam denoted as X, the other,
> denoted as Y, is aimed east to the horizon.  The apparatus is locked
> down and does not rotate;  utilizing the earth's rotation instead.  Due
> east is always the aiming direction.
>      During March, the orbital progress of the earth and moon around the
> sun is in line with the Cygnus-Orion axis.
>      On this axis, the apparatus will measure motion based upon two
> motions:  that of the sun's motion of 150 miles/sec (m/s) towards Cygnus
> (away from Orion) and the earth's orbit around the sun at 18.5 m/s.
> During other months, this condition is not true.
>      Both beams of light are projected slightly offset (normal in
> achieving interference fringes) with the X beam stationed to the right
> of the Y beam, which is rechecked at the conclusion of each run.
>      A fringe count rate is determined by dividing the number of fringes
> observed passing a screen marker by the duration of the run.
>      The moving fringes represent the change of phase between the two
> beams of light derived from a single green laser, not the motion of the
> apparatus through the field, though such phase variation is directly
> attributable to this motion.
>      The movement of the fringes may be either in the direction of the X
> beam spot, or the Y beam spot, as observed, though it has not been
> determined as to why.
>      Perhaps one of you has an explanation for this.
>      As another optical curio, on a rather muggy and drizzly evening,
> secondary fringes were seen moving in the opposite direction to the
> primary fringes I normally take account, and at a much higher rate of
> passage.  I think that it was some sort of optical reflection, nicely
> magnifying the sensitivity of the apparatus.
>      Keep in mind that the earth's orbit component is also maximum at
> noonday and at midnight, at this time of year, near the vernal equinox,
> and though quite small at 18.5 m/s compared to the galactic rotation
> component, somewhere around 150 m/s, they remain additive.
>      As convention in this study, galactic spin as viewed from the
> galactic north pole (considered to be south by astronomers) is
> clockwise, and considered to be positive motion,in contrast to the
> earth's counterclockwise orbital and rotational spins, both considered
> as negative in this accord.  All poles, be they galactic, solar or earth
> are aligned the same, though somewhat tilted to each other.
>      The earth's rotation at this site's latitude is -0.138 m/s;
> contributing very little to these results.  However, earth orbital data
> should be included in these calculations:  (150+18.5) m/s for daytime
> observations and (150-18.5) m/s for nocturnal observations.  March only..
>
> Conclusion
>
>      The theory of relativity developed by Albert Einstein would
> therefor be incorrect in its premise.
>      In light of this revelation, modern scientists should go back and
> review older experiments predicating current theories incorporated into
> the Standard Model, such as Hubble red-shift, Thomas Van Flandern's
> lunar occultation observations and the water drop gedanken of Democritus.
>      In the case of the red-shift, there are two ways to view this, one
> of which, hardly considered, would be the reverse perception that
> material things, ourselves, our earth and our instruments are becoming
> smaller in time, giving the impression that other celestial objects are
> moving away from us.
>      If this were to be the case, the problem of old-matter associated
> with Sir Fred Hoyle's steady-state cosmological model might be
> eliminated altogether entirely.
>      One interpretation of Thomas Van Flandern's lunar occultation
> observations supports the notion that both the earth and moon, all
> material objects for that matter, might be getting smaller, giving the
> impression that the earth-moon orbit is enlarging, as Van Flandern
> alternatively concludes.
>      Today's expenditures on high-energy particle colliders finds its
> premise on the older notions of atomism, going back to Democritus, who
> supposed, once identifying the smallest extant form of water possible,
> the atomoi, many such atomois making up a greater body of water would be
> separated by some distance apart.  When asked by his compatriots what
> this interstitial medium was, he said that it was non-existence,
> equivalent to empty space or
> nothing.
>      Under strict rules of logic, the absence of separation, directly
> implies touching, which ought to relegate the concept of atomism into
> nonsense, something again, modern science should review.
>
> What is luminiferous ether?
>
>      Luminiferous ether comprises four fundamental forms.  These forms
> exist because their probability of existence is unity (1.0).
>      The principle form is unbounded space as substance, rather than
> nothing, as originally supposed by classical science, nor an imaginary
> continuum as supposed by post classical science.  It is not matter, such
> as dark matter, nor a fluid as advocated towards the close of classical
> physics, and much earlier by Rene Descartes.  I commonly refer to this
> form as an infinite volume.
>      The other three forms are a point, a line and a surface.  Though
> both the point and the line are virtually inert, whereas a field of
> surface abounds in interaction, each is studied because of their similar
> behaviors.
>      For example, two points imbedded within an infinite volume, may
> collide, resulting in a random exchange in association between form and
> motion.  This event, called interchange, produces nothing.
>      Accordingly, two surfaces imbedded within an infinite volume may
> collide, also resulting in interchange between them, yielding a modest
> variety of interactive behaviors, the most significant being the Induced
> Displacement Due to Interchange (IDDI).
>      IDDI is the premise for all forces-at-a-distance, such as
> gravitation, magnetism, weak and strong forces, electrostatic forces and
> both attractive and repulsive nuclear range
> forces.
>      IDDI also contributes to universal inertia and momentum, as well as
> time, time not being fundamental nor intrinsically real.
>      Since a point, a line and a surface are not substance, but only
> form, they cannot exist if not in the presence of the substance of an
> infinite volume;  an infinite volume predicating their presence.
>
> For more on this subject, go here.

The Earth's motion and its gravity slow its clock a little bit. The
Earth's spacetime curvature is in the Suns geometry as well. There is
more than one geometry in a single fabrik of space.

Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 5 May 2010 14:54
On May 4, 3:15 pm, cosmojoe <cosmo...(a)hawaiiantel.net> wrote:
> Luminiferous Ether by Joel Webb
>
>      Utilizing a Michelson type interferometer w, I was able to detect
> luminiferous ether over  a one month period of observation.
>      On the evening of March 15th I observed these fringes to be moving
> to the left for about ten minutes, and then slowly change direction, as
> though being some kind of fluid, and then begin to drift to right for
> another ten minutes.
>      Temperature variations were taken into account, the severest
> coefficient for expansion occurring across the grain, and comes to 61.4
> x 10-6 change in length per degree Centigrade at room temperature.
> Given that that the total round trip lap for either interferometer beam
> comes to 24" (each leg being 12"), one could expect a change of
> length of:
>
>       Change in beam length = 61.4 x 10-6 x 24 = 1.47 x 10-3 inches.
>
>      In relationship to the light waves traveling through the
> interferometer, which are from a green laser pointer of wavelength 532
> Nm, or, 0.00000532 meters, only about seven fringes would fit inside a
> linear change in wood grain of 1.47 x 10-3 inches, and would be unable
> to produce appreciable fringe movement, particularly if the wood
> associated with each beam should change the same, which they most likely
> would do.
>      Valid measurements were plotted yielding these results.
>      The battery of red vectors (image is available at zyx2.org)
> directed towards our galactic center, indicates that the field of
> luminiferous ether is being drawn into the galactic center, or at least
> in its direction at the location of the interferometer.
>      The blue vectors show our tangential motion towards 61 Cygni due to
> galactic rotation.
>
> Interferometer Construction, Set-up and Operation
>
>      This experiment is being performed at the time, date and location
> shown utilizing an interferometer with two equal length beams of 12",
> placed at right angles to each other.
>   The north-south beam is a reference beam denoted as X, the other,
> denoted as Y, is aimed east to the horizon.  The apparatus is locked
> down and does not rotate;  utilizing the earth's rotation instead.  Due
> east is always the aiming direction.
>      During March, the orbital progress of the earth and moon around the
> sun is in line with the Cygnus-Orion axis.
>      On this axis, the apparatus will measure motion based upon two
> motions:  that of the sun's motion of 150 miles/sec (m/s) towards Cygnus
> (away from Orion) and the earth's orbit around the sun at 18.5 m/s.
> During other months, this condition is not true.
>      Both beams of light are projected slightly offset (normal in
> achieving interference fringes) with the X beam stationed to the right
> of the Y beam, which is rechecked at the conclusion of each run.
>      A fringe count rate is determined by dividing the number of fringes
> observed passing a screen marker by the duration of the run.
>      The moving fringes represent the change of phase between the two
> beams of light derived from a single green laser, not the motion of the
> apparatus through the field, though such phase variation is directly
> attributable to this motion.
>      The movement of the fringes may be either in the direction of the X
> beam spot, or the Y beam spot, as observed, though it has not been
> determined as to why.
>      Perhaps one of you has an explanation for this.
>      As another optical curio, on a rather muggy and drizzly evening,
> secondary fringes were seen moving in the opposite direction to the
> primary fringes I normally take account, and at a much higher rate of
> passage.  I think that it was some sort of optical reflection, nicely
> magnifying the sensitivity of the apparatus.
>      Keep in mind that the earth's orbit component is also maximum at
> noonday and at midnight, at this time of year, near the vernal equinox,
> and though quite small at 18.5 m/s compared to the galactic rotation
> component, somewhere around 150 m/s, they remain additive.
>      As convention in this study, galactic spin as viewed from the
> galactic north pole (considered to be south by astronomers) is
> clockwise, and considered to be positive motion,in contrast to the
> earth's counterclockwise orbital and rotational spins, both considered
> as negative in this accord.  All poles, be they galactic, solar or earth
> are aligned the same, though somewhat tilted to each other.
>      The earth's rotation at this site's latitude is -0.138 m/s;
> contributing very little to these results.  However, earth orbital data
> should be included in these calculations:  (150+18.5) m/s for daytime
> observations and (150-18.5) m/s for nocturnal observations.  March only..
>
> Conclusion
>
>      The theory of relativity developed by Albert Einstein would
> therefor be incorrect in its premise.
>      In light of this revelation, modern scientists should go back and
> review older experiments predicating current theories incorporated into
> the Standard Model, such as Hubble red-shift, Thomas Van Flandern's
> lunar occultation observations and the water drop gedanken of Democritus.
>      In the case of the red-shift, there are two ways to view this, one
> of which, hardly considered, would be the reverse perception that
> material things, ourselves, our earth and our instruments are becoming
> smaller in time, giving the impression that other celestial objects are
> moving away from us.
>      If this were to be the case, the problem of old-matter associated
> with Sir Fred Hoyle's steady-state cosmological model might be
> eliminated altogether entirely.
>      One interpretation of Thomas Van Flandern's lunar occultation
> observations supports the notion that both the earth and moon, all
> material objects for that matter, might be getting smaller, giving the
> impression that the earth-moon orbit is enlarging, as Van Flandern
> alternatively concludes.
>      Today's expenditures on high-energy particle colliders finds its
> premise on the older notions of atomism, going back to Democritus, who
> supposed, once identifying the smallest extant form of water possible,
> the atomoi, many such atomois making up a greater body of water would be
> separated by some distance apart.  When asked by his compatriots what
> this interstitial medium was, he said that it was non-existence,
> equivalent to empty space or
> nothing.
>      Under strict rules of logic, the absence of separation, directly
> implies touching, which ought to relegate the concept of atomism into
> nonsense, something again, modern science should review.
>
> What is luminiferous ether?
>
>      Luminiferous ether comprises four fundamental forms.  These forms
> exist because their probability of existence is unity (1.0).
>      The principle form is unbounded space as substance, rather than
> nothing, as originally supposed by classical science, nor an imaginary
> continuum as supposed by post classical science.  It is not matter, such
> as dark matter, nor a fluid as advocated towards the close of classical
> physics, and much earlier by Rene Descartes.  I commonly refer to this
> form as an infinite volume.
>      The other three forms are a point, a line and a surface.  Though
> both the point and the line are virtually inert, whereas a field of
> surface abounds in interaction, each is studied because of their similar
> behaviors.
>      For example, two points imbedded within an infinite volume, may
> collide, resulting in a random exchange in association between form and
> motion.  This event, called interchange, produces nothing.
>      Accordingly, two surfaces imbedded within an infinite volume may
> collide, also resulting in interchange between them, yielding a modest
> variety of interactive behaviors, the most significant being the Induced
> Displacement Due to Interchange (IDDI).
>      IDDI is the premise for all forces-at-a-distance, such as
> gravitation, magnetism, weak and strong forces, electrostatic forces and
> both attractive and repulsive nuclear range
> forces.
>      IDDI also contributes to universal inertia and momentum, as well as
> time, time not being fundamental nor intrinsically real.
>      Since a point, a line and a surface are not substance, but only
> form, they cannot exist if not in the presence of the substance of an
> infinite volume;  an infinite volume predicating their presence.
>
> For more on this subject, go here.

What is the substance of space but geometry of distance in Einstein's
Gravity Continuum.

Mitch Raemsch
From: harald on 5 May 2010 18:58
On May 5, 12:15 am, cosmojoe <cosmo...(a)hawaiiantel.net> wrote:
> Luminiferous Ether by Joel Webb
>
>      Utilizing a Michelson type interferometer w, I was able to detect
> luminiferous ether over  a one month period of observation.
>      On the evening of March 15th I observed these fringes to be moving
> to the left for about ten minutes, and then slowly change direction, as
> though being some kind of fluid, and then begin to drift to right for
> another ten minutes.
>      Temperature variations were taken into account, the severest
> coefficient for expansion occurring across the grain, and comes to 61.4
> x 10-6 change in length per degree Centigrade at room temperature.
> Given that that the total round trip lap for either interferometer beam
> comes to 24" (each leg being 12"), one could expect a change of
> length of:
>
>       Change in beam length = 61.4 x 10-6 x 24 = 1.47 x 10-3 inches.
>
>      In relationship to the light waves traveling through the
> interferometer, which are from a green laser pointer of wavelength 532
> Nm, or, 0.00000532 meters, only about seven fringes would fit inside a
> linear change in wood grain of 1.47 x 10-3 inches, and would be unable
> to produce appreciable fringe movement, particularly if the wood
> associated with each beam should change the same, which they most likely
> would do.
>      Valid measurements were plotted yielding these results.
>      The battery of red vectors (image is available at zyx2.org)

Hi I first thought that this is a hoax; however, that web page looks
serious.
Let's first look at the context of your experiment; as you may know,
yours isn't the only experimental input. Did you read about other
experiments that have already been done? For example this one:

http://www.wbabin.net/historical/piccard5.pdf

How do you account for the different results?

[...]

> For more on this subject, go here.

Where?

Regards,
Harald



From: John Polasek on 5 May 2010 21:07
On Tue, 04 May 2010 12:15:44 -1000, cosmojoe
<cosmojoe(a)hawaiiantel.net> wrote:

>Luminiferous Ether by Joel Webb
>
> Utilizing a Michelson type interferometer w, I was able to detect
>luminiferous ether over a one month period of observation.
> On the evening of March 15th I observed these fringes to be moving
>to the left for about ten minutes, and then slowly change direction, as
>though being some kind of fluid, and then begin to drift to right for
>another ten minutes.
I am pretty sure of this: an unchanging fringe pattern swinging from
left to right is only evidence of structural deflection. The
phenomenon you are looking for would cause the pattern to
compress/expand like an accordion being stretched or squeezed, i.e.
changing to more or fewer fringes in the pattern.

I explained this to someone on YouTube a couple of months ago who
reported the same effect; his device had a slender beam subject to
gravitational bending.

> Temperature variations were taken into account, the severest
>coefficient for expansion occurring across the grain, and comes to 61.4
>x 10-6 change in length per degree Centigrade at room temperature.
>Given that that the total round trip lap for either interferometer beam
>comes to 24" (each leg being 12"), one could expect a change of
>length of:
>
John Polasek
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: The pointing out of black hole failure
Next: Electron and proton attraction by opposite charge