Testing the speed of light as being real?

Just anywhere or in a vaccum?

The photons will be out of energy long before anything approaching infinity. What you will physically see is smaller images that lack color and brightness that eventually meld to a point or a side.

The light will have diffused long before human-eye-detectable lag would occur.

The speed of light has been tested and verified in several ways; however, I think your test may be faulty because it doesn't appear to take loss of energy into account. I am not aware of anyone doing something similar.

Why not perform a simpler test. Shoot a photon into a mirror and detect when it bounces back. Then try shooting a photon into a mirror, that then bounces off a secondary mirror, and then detect when it bounces back. Add as many mirrors as you like. Each bounce will result in a measurable delay.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I fail to see the relevance ot the issue of "kentucky windage". Maybe you could explain to the board how your test deals with this issue?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What is the "kentucky windage" issue in this case? Normally it's compensating for wind force that would push a bullet around.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There are many problems and issues surrounding the current beliefs about light phenonema and one of them is this kentucky windage issue.

 

CC,

...maybe you know of a more precise term(s) for what I am describing with "kentuck windage"?

 

QQ, you stated that you didn't trust the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment because it didn't take into account what you call 'Kentucky Windage'.

My question to you is, have you ever read the experiment? Because it sounds like you know none of the detail at all.

Here is the data

http://www.physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/doc/Bender.pdf

Here is an opening paragraph from Wiki on the LLR experiment:

Is this what you are referring to as 'Kentucky Windage"?

As far as your 'stacking effect' goes, if the two mirrors are exactly parallel to each other, you won't see any stacking effect. You only see the receeding images when the mirrors are not quite parallel, then you see them curving away and you see a limited number before the cumulative angle grows too great. And how are you going to measure any delay? You expect to see it with your naked eye, while counting?

 

I am not sure the concept really applies. Hot air, dirty air, different air densities can distort light (and result in energy loss), but if you don't want to be bothered by those effects in particular then simply perform the experiment in a vaccum.

 

When shooting a rifle at a stationary target hitting it can be quite easy. But when firing a rifle at a moving target it gets a tad more difficult and requires the ability to alow for the predicted course fo the target and firing earlier to allow for the time differential between where the target was and where it will be upon getting hit.

The information you supplied which I thank you for fails to take into account that the moon is a moving target relative to the Earth platform firing the pulse.
The pulse would have to be aimed ahead or the luna position in orbit and fired "early" to allow for the pulse to strike the luna reflector and like wise in the return leg the mirror would also have to "lead the Earths base location " and fire "early" to hit the base reflector.
This is because we are using a laser pulse not unlike a biulet from a rifle targetted at a Moving target.
Am I mistaken in the above assessment?
If so please enlighten me as to how?

 

wiki
the problem is that the "dime" is moving... and no where is it discussed in the wiki article how the movement of the "dime" is accommodated. [as far as I can tell that is]
The mirror test is about testing for this issue. 300 reflections over 1 second
They state that approximately 2.5 seconds are involved in the round trip however is the extra time needed for the "windage issue" included and if so what are the details and or do the details exist.

 

if you can provide a vacuum that is at least 1000 meters in length to provide the distance required sure why not...

 

Read up on APOLLO Apache Observatory Lunar Laser-ranging Operation.

More than one "bullet" is fired. It's more like 300 quadrillion photons in a pulse.

 

Attach the mirrors to two points on a space station. They will have plenty of room left over :3

 

he hee you sure that's not 300 quadrillion +1 photons.... [chuckle] if you can define a photon in a way that is conclusive you woud be the first human to do so....

 

would that be Russian made or US made? [chuckle]

 

Probably Iranian at this pace.

 

They sell a little device, a laser range finder, used as a measuring tape. Shoot it at the wall and measure your room. Get out a measuring tape and confirm the distance is correct. You have now proved that the speed of light is c, and there's no war, it's over, the troops can go home on that long road from Kentucky, and you can rest assured that light speed is still as reliable as the day you bought your laser gadget.

 

Well, the moon's orbital velocity is 1.022 kilometers/sec. It takes light 1.2 seconds to reach the moon, so the target has moved 1.2264 kilometers. The moon is 384400 kilometers away.

So, what is the angle for your Kentucky windage?

In radians, it is 2 arctan( 1/2(1.2264/384400) which is about .000000159521 radians. At the moon's orbit, 1 radian = 57 degrees, so we are looking at abou 9.09 millionths of a degree of windage.

On edit: I just recalculated using a different method and got a windage of 15.1 millionths of a degree.

Nope, I was right the first time, aprox. .00000913 degrees.

I would furthermore submit that you didn't read the PDF of the LLR experiment I linked you to.

 

what makes you feel I am interested in proving the speed of light...

 

well I had a look and to be honest failed out find anything that indicated the issue at hand.
also if the moon has travelled 1.2264 kms in 1.2 seconds then the windage would have to be at least 1.2264 kms otherwise it would miss the target mirror by a significant amount ...yes? and this does not include the rotation of the Earth platform on it's axis at 1,470.23 kph. [Equatorial I think] wiki

yet this is not mentioned in the pdf file or anything akin to it...why not I wonder?
this is why I am suggesting using another way of testing for windage issues.

 

Maybe we should learn to speak Mandarin

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!