The results of the Michelson Morley experiment explained without relativity, shrinking dimensions.

B

beil

Valued Senior Member
A thought experiment :
You, while driving on a rainy day, doing say 40, on a rough road, are overtaking a Lorry, Truck and get showered by the water being lifted off the road from the huge exposed tires just besides your car windows. You hear a double bang, and discover later, that both your front and rear windshields have identical# strike damage. The gravel stones still stuck in them. The insurance adjustor is skeptical about the validity the rear window claim. But you are not a crook: The rear was hit with an equal force as was the front, with the same velocity, similar to
the Michelson Morley experiment in Cleveland, that measured light to come at the same speed, energy, from all directions. coming and going. so:
The random stone in the front hit at the same speed as the one that hit from the rear.? how?

The gravel lodged in the grooves of the tire as it touched the road at a standstill (some are still there) . But your 'catch' was ejected from the profile by centrifugal force on top of the wheel when it was going at double the vehicle's forward velocity, and escaping there, was flung forward , travelling at 80, , hitting your rear window. @ 40. conclusion:
If the pebbles were
photons emitted from matter, in it's spins, revolutions, which are by nature also cycloid motions, -could-, in special cases be measured with identical velocities, coming or going. imho
Michelson made by mechanics
# allowing for their very different makeup
 
Your whole post is no more than a fanciful simplistic analogy, until the last few words where you say:

"photons emitted from matter, in it's spins, revolutions, which are by nature also cycloid motions"

This sounds like word salad.

"spins, revolutions and cycloids"? That's it? There isn't even a verb in there.


Is your idea more valid than, say, "what if the whole universe were a spinning magnetic tri-pole?"


It is not hard to come up with a explanation for some single observational phenomenon.

We could have a million unrelated explanations for a million different phenomena and we'd be no further ahead.

Questions arise:
- does your shrinking dimensions idea explain any other phenomena?
- is there any independent evidence for it?
- is there any theoretical framework to it?
- is there any precedent in what we know that suggests this is a good framework?
- does your idea explain the our observatioms as good as, never mind better, than our current theories?
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
"photons emitted from matter, in it's spins, revolutions, which are by nature also cycloid motions"
Click to expand...
sorry about the short hand writing.
All matter in the universe is in some ways involved in spins, rotation, revolution-- from quarks to galaxy clusters. Therefore, when they radiate energy or expulse matter.- that will carry the imprint of those spins, orbital velocities, further,
By Nature any spin, revolution becomes a cycloid motion because it always relates to other objects, their translational velocities, ( it is a circular motion speeding along)
A cycloid has a zero velocity contact point and a double velocity region. The suggestion here being that
the emissions at ' c ' occur in the double speed phase, as seen by the observer.
 
it not so much explains, as proposes additional mechanism as a contributing cause for observed phenomena
Nebel's stubborn fixation on the footprint of the cycloid
 
beil said:
it not so much explains, as proposes additional mechanism as a contributing cause for observed phenomena
Nebel's stubborn fixation on the footprint of the cycloid
Click to expand...
If there were an additional contribution, then the numbers would not work out. The additional contribution had better be zero.
 
This seems to be a case of Occam's Sandwich: the deliberate inclusion of additional layers of filling to arrive at something that tastes great but wholly unnecessary.
;)
 
Peeples said:
This seems to be a case of Occam's Sandwich: the deliberate inclusion of additional layers of filling to arrive at something that tastes great but wholly unnecessary.
;)
Click to expand...
Yes I agree. In this case it looks as if the goal is to do away with relativity (we are always getting cranks trying to do this - often engineers). But beil doesn't seem able to explain how the proposed mechanism can achieve the results he or she claims, so it's a bit hard to scrutinise it.
 
Peeples said:
This seems to be a case of Occam's Sandwich: the deliberate inclusion of additional layers of filling to arrive at something that tastes great but wholly unnecessary.
;)
Click to expand...
Great original thought! and humour. "occam's sandwich" ha ha !! and of course Thank you for the compliment. I id not expect anyone to actually assign "nutritional value" to the idea of having cycloid motion at some level creating the effects that were observed by the able scientists of the past.
 
exchemist said:
Yes I agree. In this case it looks as if the goal is to do away with relativity (we are always getting cranks trying to do this - often engineers). But beil doesn't seem able to explain how the proposed mechanism can achieve the results he or she claims, so it's a bit hard to scrutinise it.
Click to expand...
EC, no, Nebel/Beil has no such goal, he is not a pathological 'neigh-sayer', nor has he allusions of grandeur, aspiring to 'out- stein' Einstein, or opposing the teachings because it originated in the line of the many excellent Jewish savants. May be
he is just throwing out a valid idea, an insight, and waits what evolves. It has happened before. see Alma, Timespace, Energytime
 
beil said:
EC, no, Nebel/Beil has no such goal, he is not a pathological 'neigh-sayer', nor has he allusions of grandeur, aspiring to 'out- stein' Einstein, or opposing the teachings because it originated in the line of the many excellent Jewish savants. May be
he is just throwing out a valid idea, an insight, and waits what evolves. It has happened before. see Alma, Timespace, Energytime
Click to expand...
Neigh-sayer? So not a horse, then,
 
beil said:
EC, no, Nebel/Beil has no such goal, he is not a pathological 'neigh-sayer', nor has he allusions of grandeur, aspiring to 'out- stein' Einstein, or opposing the teachings because it originated in the line of the many excellent Jewish savants. May be
he is just throwing out a valid idea, an insight, and waits what evolves. It has happened before. see Alma, Timespace, Energytime
Click to expand...
You have yet to show this idea has any validity. That's why I asked you for an example, to show how it would work. You have not provided one.

My guess is you can't.
 
beil said:
If the pebbles were
photons emitted from matter, in it's spins, revolutions, which are by nature also cycloid motions, -could-, in special cases be measured with identical velocities, coming or going. imho
Michelson made by mechanics
# allowing for their very different makeup
Click to expand...
When one gets a single result to analyse, such an hypothesis could be postulated, but one then surely submits it to further testing, different conditions etc. Your "michelson made by mechanics" idea would break down under such rigorous and robust testing. As well as the empty-calories with which you stack Occam's Sandwich, your idea might also be a case of the broken clock still showing the correct time twice a day.
Of course, as one then seeks to refine the hypothesis, one must be careful not to remove it from the purview of science by making it, for example, unfalsifiable.
 
Peeples said:
When one gets a single result to analyse, such an hypothesis could be postulated, but one then surely submits it to further testing, different conditions etc. Your "michelson made by mechanics" idea would break down under such rigorous and robust testing. As well as the empty-calories with which you stack Occam's Sandwich, your idea might also be a case of the broken clock still showing the correct time twice a day.
Of course, as one then seeks to refine the hypothesis, one must be careful not to remove it from the purview of science by making it, for example, unfalsifiable.
Click to expand...
Yes, I should have posted this under pseudo science, because the one thought experiment is not a real observation and can not be submitted to a real test, true or false.
 
exchemist said:
You have yet to show this idea has any validity. That's why I asked you for an example, to show how it would work. You have not provided one.

My guess is you can't.
Click to expand...
No I can not. like in the 'Universal cycloid motion through time' 'Alma" "Cancelled Velocities" I rely on analogies, illustrations to try to get my ideas across. so
delving into the rapidly changing understanding of the domain of the subatomic, entangled quantum world, and assert certainty would be presumptios.
I just outlined the possibility. through the thought experiment.
An entity picking up an object and expelling it at double its own velocity forward, even into the time dimension.
 
beil said:
No I can not. like in the 'Universal cycloid motion through time' 'Alma" "Cancelled Velocities" I rely on analogies, illustrations to try to get my ideas across. so
delving into the rapidly changing understanding of the domain of the subatomic, entangled quantum world, and assert certainty would be presumptios.
I just outlined the possibility. through the thought experiment.
An entity picking up an object and expelling it at double its own velocity forward, even into the time dimension.
Click to expand...
Right. James has confirmed you are nebel. I had you on Ignore before.

Bye.
 
Peeples said:
When one gets a single result to analyse, such an hypothesis could be postulated, but one then surely submits it to further testing, different conditions etc. Your "michelson made by mechanics" idea would break down under such rigorous and robust testing. As well as the empty-calories with which you stack Occam's Sandwich, your idea might also be a case of the broken clock still showing the correct time twice a day.
Of course, as one then seeks to refine the hypothesis, one must be careful not to remove it from the purview of science by making it, for example, unfalsifiable.
Click to expand...
Assuming that what Michelson was really measured was a a cycloid motion, and the "The universal cycloid motion through time" thread proposes that, and the measurements are at the contact point, ( it was a time comparison after all) then all measurements are the same.
If you live in the northern latitudes you will have ample proof: some fresh wheel tracks in the snow show that the tires seem to have been standing still, no matter the speed or direction of the vehicles movements . so:
does electro magnetism work as a cycloid ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top