I’m so glad you guys are here to help me! Wow!
Cheesesteak right on!
Okay, so what’s your next step? The spot will be shifted, we all agree on that. What do you do next?
Now we can send a radio wave or laser cone of light to the Real Life ™ moon reflector and actually measure the timing in return. In real life, effects like the atmosphere will not make a huge difference to the total time. We know the refractive index and thickness from other experiments. I have only one atomic clock accurate to 1ppb on the equator. The moon is on the horizon directly west/east. The laser and clock are rotating away from the moon, parallel to the light path in 3 dimensions. A new ping is sent every 2.5 seconds. While the beam is traveling for 2.5 sec, the earth has rotated 1100m.
Just like before with the dot!
The RT path is 2200m further than it was last ping. So there is an additional 7.3 usecs of delay, than seconds before in the last measurement. This way you can precisely measure the round trip speed of a light. Since the precision is much better than 1ns / 7.3us or 2.5 seconds. Even approaching 10 pico seconds with a better clock if the detector were so precise. You do not need to know how far away the moon is. You do not care about it’s speed or orbit. You only need the earths rotation speed which we know precisely. Yes, it changes. It does not assume isometric light speed. We are in the same inertial frame of reference. There is only one location. The other frame of the moon doesn’t matter since we are not measuring anything there. The distance to the moon has changed very little, outside of our rotation, within 2 seconds.
Let me clarify. We are sending the ping at exactly 2.5s intervals, according to the only clock in this experiment. Receiving the first ping on the hour, on the minute, on the second makes it easier to understand and explain, but arbitrary. Or we could use 1s intervals, it matters little. I have one of these clocks it is easy to verify it’s drift. We are NOT measuring the total time of travel. Let’s say it arrives at 5.000000000s. We can reset the counter to make this happen. The next time 5+2.5= 7.5s and 7.3us. We don’t care when it was sent or received. Throw out the seconds digits. Only the 7.3us DIFFERENCE.
Yes, I could have said all this in far fewer words. I typed it for a reason.
Are you following so far?
We have already done this experiment to measure C,
so I must be unto something here.
Saint_Cad: Please translate like you did before.
Ok. And … ???
You’ve described an experimental setup but sorta failed to state your hypothesis the experiment will prove or disprove. You’ve also failed to state (that I could find in the jumble of words) what measurement(s) you hope to extract.
It sounds like you’re trying to use this to measure the speed of light? We already know the speed of light, more precisely than this experiment could possibly tell us. In fact, this experiment combined with the already-known speed of light is the best way we have of measuring the distance to the Moon. That’s why we put the corner reflectors there to begin with.
Actually we know it with perfect precision. It’s a defined quantity that then establishes other units.
I’m still baffled about the OP’s goals. He seems to have some crystalline idea he’s fundamentally unable (or unwilling) to express.
Most of would like to help explain science to the as-yet unknowledgeable, but we often can’t untangle the tangled thinkers, despite our best, and best-intentioned, efforts.
I understand the attraction of the linear bottom-up approach. But sometimes stating the goal or assumed conclusion first helps keep the crowd aligned with your goals.
There’s some hidden assumptions going on from what I can tell.
One of those, I think, is that the distance between two established points can be known to some ultimate level of precision and can be used to estimate speed. As above, it’s the reverse, we use a reference speed to establish distance.
It sounds like this new experiment is similar to Rømer’s observation that the transit of Io over the disk of Jupiter occurred at the wrong time (light was assumed at the time infinite speed). So not only did he show light had a finite speed, but by calculating the difference in time knowing the distance to Jupiter at that moment he was able to calculate the speed of light.
Note: this phenomenon had been seen before. The transit was too early or too late. I believe Rømer was the first to realize the explanation.
Why is the RT (round trip I assume) twice the distance between the points on the Earth? That would be sending the first ping until receiving the second ping so I’m not sure how that would work.
It’s an experiment that has already been done. It verifies the speed of light given the speed of the rotation of the earth. Or it allows us to calculate the rotation given the speed of light. I’m talking about an experiment with known results, either way. It’s important for me, and you, to understand to get to the next step. I was hoping Saint_Cad could help me like before.
Since the earth has rotated 1100m during that interval, the path length is twice as long, 2200m.
In the end, I’m going to measure the speed of light One-Way. Which may or may not be possible. That’s what I’m trying to determine. You can read about all the previous failed attempts. I have already started some of these experiments. My hypothesis is that light is not isometric. Depending on which external frame of reference is used.
Isn’t the fact that the clock also travels 1100m during the experiment problematic?
Seems overly complicated. Just send pings from two different spots on Earth. But I’m assuming you are using one so that the clocks do not need to be calibrated. Now your description makes more sense. Your experiment is to send two pings separated by 1100m (due to the rotation of the Earth). The time for the first round trip is time t and for the second round trip is t+δt - both in seconds. Thus the round trip speed of light is 2200/δt mps
How if it reverses course? Theoretically if the light beam goes around the universe and comes up behind you, then you have one way velocity of light.
It would be a problem compared to another clock sitting in the external frame of inertial reference, floating in space. But there is only one clock here. Only one inertial frame of reference. The velocity vector is constant. Speed of light is constant, within an inertial frame of reference -Einstein
(or something like that)
Don’t forget frame-dragging.
I think your quest is under-knowledged wackiness. I’m not claiming superior knowledge. I claim only that I lack the nous to accurately separate the fly shit from the pepper where we’re going here.
I hope your quest leaves you more knowledge than you began with. I’m out.
Bye! I understand your position. I disagree. I have a team of physicists with PhD and masters from Lehigh and MIT. With decades of experience. My team designed a Drone. I’m not working alone on this. I’m not some kid. Sorry. I thought maybe someone here would be thinking outside the box?
And the orientation of the æther changing as the Earth rotates.
I’ve read all about that. It’s a theory never proven. Einstein changed his position on this later.
I’m hoping you guys will be mean and critical and find some errors in my logic.
Did I come to the right place?