[MD] constant

[Magnus Berg]

Hi Adrie

On 2010-09-03 21:25, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote:
> Okay, clearly you are improving very rapidly on gravity

Adrie, do you really think I was a novice yesterday?

> your question are
> becoming difficult and valid , most of them, not to say all
> On light and lightcompression i can see major misconceotions, but it is
> becoming interesting, mind this , the answers will move away from
> entry-level also.
>
> The biggest leech for now is this part

Magnus:
> But the thing is, it *doesn't* break the speed limit. Because in an area
> where gravity has stretched out space (and you agree that space *can* be
> stretched), in that area 1 km is longer than 1 km usually is.
>
> Say you have a 300 km long cylinder in space that has been stretched out to
> 600 km. I.e. inside the cylinder, it's still 300km long, but from the
> outside, it looks like it's 600km long. Light a laser outside one end of the
> cylinder towards the other end. The light will emerge from the cylinder
> after 1 ms because inside the cylinder it has travelled 300km, but outside
> the cylinder it looks like the light has travelled 600km in 1 ms, i.e. at
> twice the speed of light.
>
> I don't see any blurring.

> Comment Adrie,
> the role of the observer, subjective objectivity-objective subjectivity,
> strange eh?
>
> Look closely at what you just wrote, you imported an observer standing in a
> different set of coordinates, "IT LOOKS" is the voice of the observer,
> standing ,observing elsewere. The observer is observing the so called
> "relative doppler effect"distortion, yes the red or blue-shift, and so that
> it appears to be as if the light is getting compressed or stretched, forth,
> or back towards the observer.
> The error is that the observer is not in the system of coordinates of the
> observed, ie Twice the speed.......No, only the wavelenght and so the
> amplitude of the observed light is compressed or streched-so for the
> solution, ))))it only appears to be so that....etc)))
> The speed of light is not affected by the observer nor by the relative
> position of these.

It doesn't matter who's observing it. The light will emerge from the 
cylinder 1 ms after it entered it. It's not a doppler effect because 
that comes from accelerating objects emitting radiation in normal space.
The "system of coordinates" you and relativity is talking about is 
different "boxes" whizzing about in normal space but at different speeds 
and directions. What I'm talking about is *not* normal space, so 
relativity doesn't apply.


> Magnus
>
>> If it should not be residing in the particle's appearance's then every
>> object on earth should be moving at lightspeed all the time.
>>
>
> Why?
>
>
> Adrie, well gravity keep us at our places , we would be floating around, all
> objects would, in absence of gravity.
> But you can see it in a spacelab, astronauts floating around, if it was not
> for the walls and the ceilings of the spacecraft they would be
> truly keep on accelerating endlessly, same goes for us and all objects
> around us , air resistance would prevent it on earth to happen
> in absence of gravity, but this aside.
> all would be speeding up indefinite, gravity prevents it.this is not my
> model , Magnus , it is common knowledge.

Ah, so you say gravity is the force that is preventing the universe from 
being pulled apart at an ever accelerated pace? Like dark energy does? :)

Actually, push-gravity's main advantage is just that, to avoid having to 
patch the model with exotic stuff like dark matter and dark energy.

The universe *is* expanding at an ever increased pace, and I say it's 
gravity who is pushing the universe apart, it's not holding it together. 
It's not pulling galaxies or solar systems together, they are pushed 
together from the outside.

	Magnus