Testing the speed of light as being real?

Yes, 1.2264 km at a distance of 3884400 km is a correction angle of 15 millionths of a degree.

Here's a suggestion. Go to the wiki page on the LLR. Then go down to the citations.

Everything you don't want to know about the LLR is there.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Also, the spread of the laser by the time it gets to the moon is 2 km.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/basics.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Furthermore, ( I knew you didn't read the pdf),

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

contains your 'windage' corrections on pages 7 and 8.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes I did read it but understood very little. To help focus which table refers to the corrections needed for the luna orbit?

 

well then this makes it very difficult to prove the windage issue unless they can determine where in the 2km diffusion the mirrors are situated.

I still think the mirror test would be a better demonstration, but have doubts about the degradation of the reflections over 300 repetitions

 

Table 1 at the bottom of page 7 contains the selenocentric reflector coordinates with respect to the "mean earth direction and mean rotation axis" as well as the geocentric longitude, spin-axis distance and height above the equatorial plane with respect to the Conventional International Origin.

 

It's not about Kentucky windage. It could be about leading the target, or (deflection), I don't even think that is an issue because of the spread.

 

This:

It's a test. Of what, if not light speed? You keep talking about windage, which applies to moving projectiles which has no bearing on the stationary mirrors of your test fixture.

So, why not just come out and state clearly what the purpose of your test is? Otherwise you've created a maze of words from which there is no possible escape!

 

Use the mirrors as an etalon, not for stacking, but for a progression.

 

Quantum Quack;

In the reply on Jupiter and Ole Romer, does your Kentucky windage mean astronomical aberration?

 

After a bit of research from your lead...light-time correction would be a more appropriate describer I feel..
However the effect by abruptly changing the alignment of the mirrors [example by knocking the mirrors with your fist] invokes the light time correction over 300 reflections leading to to a "stacking" effect of those reflections as they reduce by that 300 x 1000 meter increments.

If light speed is as currently held the stacking effect should be evident, there will be a time delay included on all those reflections when compared to the first reflection.
Comparing reflection 1 with reflection 300 should demonstrate a delay of at least 1 second [ assuming 'c'= 300000kps for the sake of simplicity] as the mirror returns to it's original rest position after being impacted upon and well within visual observability.
[hit the mirro with your fist , set up a a single judder, allow the mirror to come to rest and the delay should be evident in the stacking of the reflections as the mirror returns to rest...]

 

Aqueous, My apologies if I have inadvertantly misled you.

my initial post:

The impacting on the alignment of the mirrors produces a "moving target" so to speak.
The test is just another way to demonstrate an attribute of light being not so much it's speed but its "straight line vector" relative to it's speed.
It may also I have just realised have implications on demonstrating the wave/particle duality and possibly providing yet another of the miriad or solutions already available.

 

By your answers, it seems that you are struggling to understand something, but I haven't figured out what it is.

Do you doubt that light travels at light speed, or that it travels in a straight line, or any other reservations?

In other words, why did you even come up with this idea? What was going on in your head? Is it just a matter of curiosity?

You were talking about lining up these mirrors very precisely, which rules out any motion. Without motion, there is no need to steer the beam, which was the analogy you raised with Kentucky windage.

Any questions, feel free to ask. I'm by no means as qualified as many of the others folks on this site, but I at the level this has gone so far, I'm able to assist.

 

This may conflict with the subject, but what about the speed of dark? I've never heard anyone think or talk about It. Not that It even makes sense or can even be proven, but the question It's self. Just thinking outside the box, I suppose.

 

"Dark" is what humans call the absence of photons that their eyes can detect. It's not an entity that actually exists; hence, "the speed of dark" is a nonsensical phrase.

 

It makes sense, cause people see in the light and they don't in the dark.

 

I still don't get the stacked image thing. A pulse of laser will reflect off the mirror without being delayed going through "stacked" images. They aren't real. The photon doesn't have to go through them one at a time. They don't add depth to the mirror's surface.