SR and one-way light speed tests

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
[LB]: A point of clarification - I've noticed that Dr Van Flandern uses the abreviation "MM" to mean Meta Model and the abreviation "M-M" to mean Michaelson Morley.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I mean the Michelson-Morely experiment, not the Meta Model. The light pulse drift between two mirrors can be viewed as throwing a ball in an aircraft from one side of the aisle to the other and measuring whether the ball experiences drift in the direction of the tail. However, I think that this effect has already been measured by the original MM experiment.

OK, I accept that this test is two-way - going by strict definition. But the fact that the beam travels from clock A to clock B in both parts makes it different from the normal M-M type experiments. But more importantly you cannot deny that the clock sync errors cancel out when the times are subtracted, and so whether Einstein's method for clock synchronization is used or not is unimportant. This is why this simple test is important. I don't know why nobody has done it yet?

If there is a galactic component to the ether flow, it will make the time difference even bigger.

quote:

---

The signals you propose to send in your test are a subset of the GPS signals that already exist.

---

I can show that equations used in SR are a subset (limit process) of wisp equations and so there are deeper roots to my thinking. Perhaps it's a little unfair that the clocks in the GPS are synchronized by Einstein's method, a test that eliminates any clock sync error must be better.

quote:

---

Moving the goalposts? I said only that your 6.7nS doesn't exist...

---

Yes the 0.9nS error is a side issue, but the 6.7nS doesn't exist! Maybe it doesn't, but I have not seen any proof. When I first realized that my theory predicted this, I must admit I was disappointed that I hadn't picked it up earlier. But after carefully checking existing tests, I realize that in truth nobody has done this test, and I'm absolutely convinced it will give the predicted result. I know it seems at odds with current views, but I stand by it 100% - if its wrong my theory is wrong.

I read in books "the SR Doppler equations cannot be derived from a fluid medium". But my equations produce the SR Doppler equations when the observer's motion through the ether is set to zero. And also "the Lorentz Force Law cannot work in an ether flow". But wisp theory shows that it can - it's a little complex though. This has nothing to do with the light experiment; the only point I'm making is that the 6.7nS prediction is backed up by serious thought. And if I can prove it wrong I will (I'm not into propping up weak theories). But when I sense that SR has weaknesses then it should be tested more thoroughly, and this is just one test for it.

I am not fully convinced that the GPS data is proof, because there are too many variables and clock sync is Einstein's way.

wisp

There is an easy way to find out if the mirror slows down the process in any way- use several mirrors to bounce the photon off of and if there is any loss of time or whatever you will know the mirror did the deed. That should get similar results to what you want to do and this is a lot easier to do and will work.

The M-M experiment used several sets of mirrors to bounce the light back and forth each way, but because the number of mirrors used on each arm were equal any mirror delay effects would cancel, making it difficult to measure.
The subject of delays is important because it would affect the result. In the case of the "one-way" test proposed there are no mirrors and so this does not matter here.
I am looking for any info on delays in satellite GPS sending data back and forth.
I think the dalays are around 20mS for sending data one-way and about 80mS for internet data forwarding on (figures found on an internet draft message, but I don't really know what they mean). I think that the programs handling GPS data expect signal delays of about 40mS or 120mS if data is internet! I am looking for data on GPS that can be considered a valid test for one-way light speed measurements. My feeling is that the delays are too big to make this valid.

wisp

wispspace,

I would anticipate that most of the GPS delay is equipment processing generated.

Knowing to believe only half
of what you hear is a sign of
intelligence.
Knowing which half to believe
can make you a genius.

Hoping to keep this thread in focus I'll stick to the MMX and avoid the GPS data. The mirrors can be used to measure any effect that may result from one way traval. Just think about using 1, 2, or more of them and comparing the data. Won't that work well even though it is too simple?