Michelson and Morley experiment

On Nov 12, 2:06*pm, PD wrote:

Didn't have to copy it at all. The first and second experiments I
repeated myself, with some colleagues. The third was directly verified
in experiments by colleagues. Been there, examined the apparatus,
reviewed the data and the analysis.

PD-

It's biased then. *Do not quote your research. *Somebody may really
examine them and find that you fiddled the data. *You may lose your
degree and your job retroactively.

I invite the examination. That's the point of corroboration in
research. The results I gave are corroborated. The corroboration by
independent investigators is science's way of guarding against bias.


Good. Since you invite the examination, provide the links.

On Nov 12, 2:42*pm, Dono wrote:
On Nov 12, 9:30*am, "Strich.9" wrote:





On Nov 12, 11:33*am, Dono wrote:

On Nov 12, 8:19 am, "Strich.9" wrote:

1) You have a clock and I have a clock. We are at relative rest.
2) Both clocks are ticking at the same rate.

Correct
3) I move at v=0.41c. *My clock rate does not change locally.

Correct
4) You are left behind. *Your clock rate does not change locally.

Correct, you are getting it

5) Since neither clock changed, WHERE IS TIME DILATION?

If you send me a signal every second measured on your clock I will
detect that the separation between these signals to be MORE than one
second on my clock.

If I send you a signal every second measured on my clock, you will
detect that the separation between these signals to be MORE than one
second on your clock.

The above is called time dilation, it has been confirmed
experimentally. Got that, persistent imbecile?

CONTRIVED explanation.

What if nobody sends a signal? *Does time dilation still exist? *

If nobody sends signals there is no way of comparing clocks,
persistent imbecile. Time dilation (like length contraction) is all
about comparing measurements between observers in motion, old fart.-

Do I need to send signals to measure mass?
Do I need to send signals to measure energy?
Do I need to send signals to measure distance?
Do I need to send signals to measure regular time?

NO
NO
NO
NO

Now you are free to illustrate your signal happy method and illustrate
how much time dilation is in the following setup:

1) You have a clock and I have a clock. We are at relative rest.
2) Both clocks are ticking at the same rate.

3) I move at v=0.41c. My clock rate does not change locally. NO
CHANGE, got that?

4) You are left behind. Your clock rate does not change locally. NO
CHANGE, got that?

5) Since neither clock changed, WHERE IS TIME DILATION?



OH I FORGOT. Your method is only good in theory. It cannot make
actual measurements. Not even in a hypothetical example.

On Nov 12, 11:54*am, "Strich.9" wrote:
snip imbecilities

Stubborn old fart,

How do you plan to find out the results of a measurement executed in a
lab that is moving wrt your lab without exchanging signals?

On Nov 12, 6:06*pm, Dono wrote:
On Nov 12, 11:54*am, "Strich.9" wrote:

snip imbecilities

Stubborn old fart,

How do you plan to find out the results of a measurement executed in a
lab that is moving wrt your lab without exchanging signals?

Does the act of exchanging signals change the results of the
measurement in the moving lab? NO.

Can I perform the same measurement in my lab and be guaranteed the
same result? YES. That is frame invariance.

Therefore I can simply perform the same measurement in my non-moving
lab and get the same measurement.

Instead of measuring the time in the moving LAB clock, I can measure
the time in my OWN identical clock. Will this time be the same time?
OF COURSE.

Oh wait, you cannot understand this simple idea because you are
COMPELLED by your faith in relativity to introduce that time dilation
factor.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Too bad.

On Nov 12, 4:13*pm, wrote:
On Nov 12, 6:06*pm, Dono wrote:

On Nov 12, 11:54*am, "Strich.9" wrote:

snip imbecilities

Stubborn old fart,

How do you plan to find out the results of a measurement executed in a
lab that is moving wrt your lab without exchanging signals?

Does the act of exchanging signals change the results of the
measurement in the moving lab? *NO.

Can I perform the same measurement in my lab and be guaranteed the
same result? *YES. *

Old fart,

Time dilation is about what someone in a lab MOVING wrt your lab
measures. How stoopid are you?


That is frame invariance.

Umm, no, old fart. You can take a break from talking about things you
have no clue about :-)

On Nov 12, 7:22*pm, Dono wrote:
On Nov 12, 4:13*pm, wrote:





On Nov 12, 6:06*pm, Dono wrote:

On Nov 12, 11:54*am, "Strich.9" wrote:

snip imbecilities

Stubborn old fart,

How do you plan to find out the results of a measurement executed in a
lab that is moving wrt your lab without exchanging signals?

Does the act of exchanging signals change the results of the
measurement in the moving lab? *NO.

Can I perform the same measurement in my lab and be guaranteed the
same result? *YES. *

Old fart,

Time dilation is about what someone in a lab MOVING wrt your lab
measures. How stoopid are you?


so WHERE is this time dilation fetish you are so obsessed with in the
example below:

1) You have a clock and I have a clock. We are at relative rest.
2) Both clocks are ticking at the same rate.

3) I move at v=0.41c. My clock rate does not change locally. NO
CHANGE, got that?

4) You are left behind. Your clock rate does not change locally. NO
CHANGE, got that?

5) Since neither clock changed, WHERE IS TIME DILATION?

On Nov 12, 4:37*pm, wrote:
On Nov 12, 7:22*pm, Dono wrote:





On Nov 12, 4:13*pm, wrote:

On Nov 12, 6:06*pm, Dono wrote:

On Nov 12, 11:54*am, "Strich.9" wrote:

snip imbecilities

Stubborn old fart,

How do you plan to find out the results of a measurement executed in a
lab that is moving wrt your lab without exchanging signals?

Does the act of exchanging signals change the results of the
measurement in the moving lab? *NO.

Can I perform the same measurement in my lab and be guaranteed the
same result? *YES. *

Old fart,

Time dilation is about what someone in a lab MOVING wrt your lab
measures. How stoopid are you?

so WHERE is this time dilation fetish you are so obsessed with in the
example below:

1) You have a clock and I have a clock. We are at relative rest.
2) Both clocks are ticking at the same rate.

3) I move at v=0.41c. *My clock rate does not change locally. *NO
CHANGE, got that?

4) You are left behind. *Your clock rate does not change locally. *NO
CHANGE, got that?

5) Since neither clock changed, WHERE IS TIME DILATION?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are an IMBECILE, old fart :-)

On Nov 12, 7:42*pm, Dono wrote:

You are an IMBECILE, old fart :-)- -- Sample of low IQ reply.

On Nov 12, 1:49*pm, "Strich.9" wrote:
On Nov 12, 2:06*pm, PD wrote:





Didn't have to copy it at all. The first and second experiments I
repeated myself, with some colleagues. The third was directly verified
in experiments by colleagues. Been there, examined the apparatus,
reviewed the data and the analysis.

PD-

It's biased then. *Do not quote your research. *Somebody may really
examine them and find that you fiddled the data. *You may lose your
degree and your job retroactively.

I invite the examination. That's the point of corroboration in
research. The results I gave are corroborated. The corroboration by
independent investigators is science's way of guarding against bias.

Good. *Since you invite the examination, provide the links.

I have already. Don't you remember me pointing you directly to the g-2
links, as well as the experimental paper on the pi-zero decays? That
wasn't that long ago. What happened to your memory? Did you have
electroshock therapy this week? Can't you look up where I did that on
google? Don't know how to do it? Exactly how many times do you want to
be spoonfed the very same thing over and over and over again?

You baited me once into spoonfeeding you. I think at this point it's
just worth pointing out that you have significant short-term memory
loss. What medication are you taking for that?

PD

On Nov 13, 8:38*am, PD wrote:
On Nov 12, 1:49*pm, "Strich.9" wrote:





On Nov 12, 2:06*pm, PD wrote:

Didn't have to copy it at all. The first and second experiments I
repeated myself, with some colleagues. The third was directly verified
in experiments by colleagues. Been there, examined the apparatus,
reviewed the data and the analysis.

PD-

It's biased then. *Do not quote your research. *Somebody may really
examine them and find that you fiddled the data. *You may lose your
degree and your job retroactively.

I invite the examination. That's the point of corroboration in
research. The results I gave are corroborated. The corroboration by
independent investigators is science's way of guarding against bias.

Good. *Since you invite the examination, provide the links.

I have already. Don't you remember me pointing you directly to the g-2
links, as well as the experimental paper on the pi-zero decays? That
wasn't that long ago. What happened to your memory? Did you have
electroshock therapy this week? Can't you look up where I did that on
google? Don't know how to do it? Exactly how many times do you want to
be spoonfed the very same thing over and over and over again?

You baited me once into spoonfeeding you. I think at this point it's
just worth pointing out that you have significant short-term memory
loss. What medication are you taking for that?

PD-

Go ahead, continue LYING. That's what RELATIVITY is all about.