Hi Dan
> experiments did not measure what we thought they
> measured, but rather only measured the instruments themselves.
Stronger than the Eisenberg principle.
Thanks
Marco
-----Messaggio Originale-----
Da: Dan Glover <glove@indianvalley.com>
A: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Data invio: giovedì 22 giugno 2000 18.46
Oggetto: MD speed, space and time
> Hello everyone
>
> I don't know if everyone has read the new moq.org link:
>
>
http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2000/06/04/stifgnusa01007.html
>
> but the findings pose serious challenges to how we currently view
> Universe. First, space and time are no longer united as Albert Einstein
> declared them to be with his Theory of Special Relativity. It is now
> seen that what Einstein described, while being a valid point of view,
> only operates under very specific circumstances.
>
> What does this mean exactly? Basically it seems the problem boils down
> to our measuring instruments. We know what the speed of light is for we
> have measured it very carefully, with highly precise, technologically
> advanced instruments. What is it that is being measured, however?
> Looking at the findings of Dr. Wang, it becomes apparent that the
> measuring instrument itself is being measured and not the speed of
> light. In other words, a response to the delay of the receiver. Another
> researcher, Ralph Sansbury, writes:
>
> "A similar explanation applies to the red shift in radar reflections
> from venus and mercury
> when they are on the opposite side of the sun; that is the gravitational
> effect of the sun is not to
> change the time scale of light wave disturbances in the ether near the
> sun so as to increase the time
> between successive peaks and valleys of a sine oscillation but to
> influence the radar receiving
> antennas on the earth so that they do not respond as quickly to changes
> in oscillating forces on the
> free electrons in their antennas resulting in a lower frequency for the
> received oscillation of charge in
> the radar antenna." (see http://www.magna.com.au/~prfbrown/news96_f.html
> )
>
> For years, experiments have suggested light propagates instantaneously
> and the the light of stars we see shining overhead are not millions and
> billions of years old at all, as is commonly presumed. The volume of
> research leading to this point of view is staggering:
>
> http://www.padrak.com/~ine/index.shtml#RS_REFS
>
> The law of conservation of energy so befuddled Niels Bohr that he
> abandoned it in his early career, only to be forced back into accepting
> it when experiments seemingly confirmed the law. What Bohr didn't
> realize then, and what we are only starting to realize now, is that
> those experiments did not measure what we thought they measured, but
> rather only measured the instruments themselves.
>
> Could light may be the medium through which electromagnetic waves
> travel? It is appearing more and more that this may be.
>
> Thoughts, anyone?
>
> Dan
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:45 BST