One Way Speed of Light Experiment

[cincirob]

Over the years much as been made of the idea that the one-way speed of light has not been measured. Apparently, it has according to the article at this site:

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD ... tTRDoc.pdf

It even includes slow clock transport.

cinci

[xuqut]

Over the years much as been made of the idea that the one-way speed of light has not been measured. Apparently, it has according to the article at this site:

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD ... tTRDoc.pdf

It even includes slow clock transport.

cinci

Slow clock transport is only an acceleration issue.


This model claims to use clocks but in fact did frequency comparisons using hydrogen masers.

This paper confesses the frequency comparison.

http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/humphrey.pdf

Therefore, a frequency is compared to a frequency and timing is claimed. This is no different from MMX.

Here we are again with frequency based experiments that we already know should produced a null result for frequency modification. The frequency of light is constant in all directions from the emission point in the the frame.

That is completely different from proving the speed of light is measured constant in all directions.

It is not that the speed of light is not constant in space it is, It is that all objects are in motion and move relative to the constant speed of light.

It should measure timing wise different values. Frequency comparisons are blind to this issue.

[xuqut]

Here is more.

This paper references this experiment as backup.


http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/R ... -way_tests
Krisher et al., Phys. Rev. D, 42, No. 2, pg 731–734, (1990).
Uses two hydrogen masers fixed to the Earth and separated by a 21-km fiber-optic link to look for variations in the phase between them. They put an upper limit on the one-way linear anisotropy of 100 m/s.

To correctly meaure clock timing.

The clock needs to record the time when light strikes it. Nothing more.

In fact, the paper mentions light group velocity. Again, this is a phase issue.

The correct way to do this experiment is to put a fiber optic cable underground in a stable area.

Place east to west.


Record the time the signal left.

Record the time the light strikes the receiver.

It will not matter if they are in sync. They should produce a cosine pattern,

If it does, the light is an absolute constant and then earth moves relative to the constant light.

If not, then the Ritz's theory/SR always measure at c theory is validated and light moves relative to the frame. If this is true, then light moves with the absolute motion of the frame. But, we would detect this from tests of moving light sources.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/R ... urce_tests

[cincirob]

xuqut: Slow clock transport is only an acceleration issue.

cinci: No, it's a speed issue.
***************************

xuqut: This model claims to use clocks but in fact did frequency comparisons using hydrogen masers.

cinci: They used hydrogen maser clocks.
**********************************

xuqut: This paper confesses the frequency comparison.

cinci: They measured the round trip times with one clock which they call stationary and they measured the one-way time with the clock which was slow transported to 26 km away. The got the same speed with an accuracy of .000015c.
*************************************

xuqut: http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/humphrey.pdf Therefore, a frequency is compared to a frequency and timing is claimed. This is no different from MMX.

cinic: Yes, your article is the same as the MMX and with the same result: relativity is correct. The article I posted is something altogether different.
****************************

xuqut: Here we are again with frequency based experiments that we already know should produced a null result for frequency modification. The frequency of light is constant in all directions from the emission point in the the frame.

cinci: The MMX was not a frequency based experiment. It was an experiment based on timing. Here is Michelson's paper: http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/refs/mm.html
******************************

xuqut: That is completely different from proving the speed of light is measured constant in all directions.

cinci: It's alway hard to tell what you're addressing. If it's my article, then every time the rean the test it was in a different direction. The Earth rotates.
*****************************************

xuqut: It is not that the speed of light is not constant in space it is, It is that all objects are in motion and move relative to the constant speed of light. It should measure timing wise different values. Frequency comparisons are blind to this issue.

cinci: Neither the MMX or the experiment described in the article I posted were looking at frequency shifts. Michelson compared the time along two different paths and the article I posed actually measure teh speed of light one-way and two-way.
*****************************************

[xuqut]

xuqut: Slow clock transport is only an acceleration issue.

cinci: No, it's a speed issue.
***************************

The article is about the equivalence of clock synchonization using the clock sync method of einstein and slow clock transport.

The take clocks synched at a close position and move them slowly out at a distance. Acceleration alters clocks and that is why it must be slow.

You are not up to speed with me here.

BTW their are other articles that put a limit of both methods in the nano-second range.

xuqut: This model claims to use clocks but in fact did frequency comparisons using hydrogen masers.

cinci: They used hydrogen maser clocks.
**********************************

They are comparing phase. Any true clock with light must use the photoelectric effect to signal the strike of light.

Otherwise, you are using some function of MMX and frequency.

xuqut: http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/humphrey.pdf Therefore, a frequency is compared to a frequency and timing is claimed. This is no different from MMX.

cinic: Yes, your article is the same as the MMX and with the same result: relativity is correct. The article I posted is something altogether different.
****************************

Wring, the signal sent to the hydrogen maser was measured with a frequency component. This article confessess this is an MMX derivative.

xuqut: Here we are again with frequency based experiments that we already know should produced a null result for frequency modification. The frequency of light is constant in all directions from the emission point in the the frame.

cinci: The MMX was not a frequency based experiment. It was an experiment based on timing. Here is Michelson's paper: http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/refs/mm.html
******************************

All timing must use the photo electric effect to detect when light hit the target.

All other devices use some function of phase /or frequency.

I posted several articvles and I am not going to do more where all frequency based experiments cannot prove an absolute constant speed of light.

xuqut: That is completely different from proving the speed of light is measured constant in all directions.

cinci: It's alway hard to tell what you're addressing. If it's my article, then every time the rean the test it was in a different direction. The Earth rotates.
*****************************************

Frequency proves nothing.

xuqut: It is not that the speed of light is not constant in space it is, It is that all objects are in motion and move relative to the constant speed of light. It should measure timing wise different values. Frequency comparisons are blind to this issue.

cinci: Neither the MMX or the experiment described in the article I posted were looking at frequency shifts. Michelson compared the time along two different paths and the article I posed actually measure teh speed of light one-way and two-way.
*****************************************

How did they detect when the light reciever was hit?

Dd they use the photo electric effect to trigger a recording of the time or did they use frequency and phase?

A light timer can only measure true time of the light strike by the photo electric effect.

[cincirob]

xuqut: Slow clock transport is only an acceleration issue.

cinci: No, it's a speed issue.

xuqut: The article is about the equivalence of clock synchonization using the clock sync method of einstein and slow clock transport.

cinci: The standard way of synchronizing clocks is Einstein's round trip light signal idea. But, if you want to check the one-way speed, you can't use the two way clock setting method because the setting on the clock would be a function of the two-way speed. So to get a clock synchronized at a distance without using a round trip light signal, you set them when they are at the same place and slowly move the clock to the distant position. If you move it slowly, the relaticitic effects are minimized and can be ignored or estimated.
*******************************

xuqut: They take clocks synched at a close position and move them slowly out at a distance. Acceleration alters clocks and that is why it must be slow.

cinci: No, realtive speed makes the clocks run slow. Acceleration has nothing to do with it. dt' = dt(1 - (v/c)^2)^.5. See, no acceleration, just velocity.
************************************

xuqut: You are not up to speed with me here.

cinci: No, I'm way ahead of you and waiting for you to catch up.
***************************

xuqut: BTW their are other articles that put a limit of both methods in the nano-second range.

cinci: OK. There are other atricles. I'm only interested in this one.
************************

xuqut: This model claims to use clocks but in fact did frequency comparisons using hydrogen masers.

cinci: They used hydrogen maser clocks.

xuqut: They are comparing phase. Any true clock with light must use the photoelectric effect to signal the strike of light. Otherwise, you are using some function of MMX and frequency.

cinci: All clocks have something that vibrates at some rate be it pendulum, a quartz crystal, a cesium fountain, or in this case, a hydrogen maser. The faster it vibrates, the more parts it divides a second into so higher frequency gives greater accuracy. That's all the maser is used for. It's a clock. It isn't the light signal they are sending over the 26 km path.
***************************

xuqut: http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/humphrey.pdf Therefore, a frequency is compared to a frequency and timing is claimed. This is no different from MMX.

cinic: Yes, your article is the same as the MMX and with the same result: relativity is correct. The article I posted is something altogether different.

xuqut: Wrong, the signal sent to the hydrogen maser was measured with a frequency component. This article confessess this is an MMX derivative.

cinci: They sent light pulses and used mirrors. Masers mean microwaves and mirrors don't work for them. It's all explained in the abstract. They used hydrogen maser clocks. Look at the diagram in Figure #1. They fired a laser (not a maser) through a telescope. The masers were just part of a clock. Right under this figure they say they were measuring time, not waves. Read the danged article and stop making up you own stuff.
**************************************

xuqut: Here we are again with frequency based experiments that we already know should produced a null result for frequency modification. The frequency of light is constant in all directions from the emission point in the the frame.

cinci: The MMX was not a frequency based experiment. It was an experiment based on timing. Here is Michelson's paper: http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/refs/mm.html

xuqut: All timing must use the photo electric effect to detect when light hit the target. All other devices use some function of phase /or frequency. I posted several articvles and I am not going to do more where all frequency based experiments cannot prove an absolute constant speed of light.

cinci: Well this experiment was not a frequency experiment and neither was the Michelson- Morley experiment as youcan see if you just read them. Michelson was using a sodium lamp. do you really think he had the necessary equipment to measure light frequencies in 1887?
*******************************

xuqut: That is completely different from proving the speed of light is measured constant in all directions.

cinci: It's alway hard to tell what you're addressing. If it's my article, then every time the rean the test it was in a different direction. The Earth rotates.

xuqut: Frequency proves nothing.

cinci: Even if this were true, it doesn't change the fact that this experiment times the light. It didn't measure its frequency.
***************************


xuqut: It is not that the speed of light is not constant in space it is, It is that all objects are in motion and move relative to the constant speed of light. It should measure timing wise different values. Frequency comparisons are blind to this issue.

cinci: Neither the MMX or the experiment described in the article I posted were looking at frequency shifts. Michelson compared the time along two different paths and the article I posed actually measure teh speed of light one-way and two-way.

xuqut: How did they detect when the light reciever was hit?

cinci: Michelson wasn't measuring speed. He was comparing the time it took two rays of light to travers different paths and he was loking at interference patterns when he recombined the rays. Read his paper.
****************************

xuqut: Did they use the photo electric effect to trigger a recording of the time or did they use frequency and phase?

cinci: The photoelctric effect was discovered the same year Michelson did his experiment so no, he wasn't using it. I'm sure teh experiment in the article I posted was using some form of it. If you read the article they tell what equaipment they use to see the signal. It's a Lasermetrics diod of some sort. Read the article.
***********************

A light timer can only measure true time of the light strike by the photo electric effect.

cinci: Read the article.
***************

[xuqut]

xuqut: Slow clock transport is only an acceleration issue.

cinci: No, it's a speed issue.

xuqut: The article is about the equivalence of clock synchonization using the clock sync method of einstein and slow clock transport.

cinci: The standard way of synchronizing clocks is Einstein's round trip light signal idea. But, if you want to check the one-way speed, you can't use the two way clock setting method because the setting on the clock would be a function of the two-way speed. So to get a clock synchronized at a distance without using a round trip light signal, you set them when they are at the same place and slowly move the clock to the distant position. If you move it slowly, the relaticitic effects are minimized and can be ignored or estimated.
*******************************

xuqut: They take clocks synched at a close position and move them slowly out at a distance. Acceleration alters clocks and that is why it must be slow.

cinci: No, realtive speed makes the clocks run slow. Acceleration has nothing to do with it. dt' = dt(1 - (v/c)^2)^.5. See, no acceleration, just velocity.
************************************

xuqut: You are not up to speed with me here.

cinci: No, I'm way ahead of you and waiting for you to catch up.
***************************

xuqut: BTW their are other articles that put a limit of both methods in the nano-second range.

cinci: OK. There are other atricles. I'm only interested in this one.
************************

xuqut: This model claims to use clocks but in fact did frequency comparisons using hydrogen masers.

cinci: They used hydrogen maser clocks.

xuqut: They are comparing phase. Any true clock with light must use the photoelectric effect to signal the strike of light. Otherwise, you are using some function of MMX and frequency.

cinci: All clocks have something that vibrates at some rate be it pendulum, a quartz crystal, a cesium fountain, or in this case, a hydrogen maser. The faster it vibrates, the more parts it divides a second into so higher frequency gives greater accuracy. That's all the maser is used for. It's a clock. It isn't the light signal they are sending over the 26 km path.
***************************

xuqut: http://www.physics.harvard.edu/Thesespdfs/humphrey.pdf Therefore, a frequency is compared to a frequency and timing is claimed. This is no different from MMX.

cinic: Yes, your article is the same as the MMX and with the same result: relativity is correct. The article I posted is something altogether different.

xuqut: Wrong, the signal sent to the hydrogen maser was measured with a frequency component. This article confessess this is an MMX derivative.

cinci: They sent light pulses and used mirrors. Masers mean microwaves and mirrors don't work for them. It's all explained in the abstract. They used hydrogen maser clocks. Look at the diagram in Figure #1. They fired a laser (not a maser) through a telescope. The masers were just part of a clock. Right under this figure they say they were measuring time, not waves. Read the danged article and stop making up you own stuff.
**************************************

xuqut: Here we are again with frequency based experiments that we already know should produced a null result for frequency modification. The frequency of light is constant in all directions from the emission point in the the frame.

cinci: The MMX was not a frequency based experiment. It was an experiment based on timing. Here is Michelson's paper: http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/refs/mm.html

xuqut: All timing must use the photo electric effect to detect when light hit the target. All other devices use some function of phase /or frequency. I posted several articvles and I am not going to do more where all frequency based experiments cannot prove an absolute constant speed of light.

cinci: Well this experiment was not a frequency experiment and neither was the Michelson- Morley experiment as youcan see if you just read them. Michelson was using a sodium lamp. do you really think he had the necessary equipment to measure light frequencies in 1887?
*******************************

xuqut: That is completely different from proving the speed of light is measured constant in all directions.

cinci: It's alway hard to tell what you're addressing. If it's my article, then every time the rean the test it was in a different direction. The Earth rotates.

xuqut: Frequency proves nothing.

cinci: Even if this were true, it doesn't change the fact that this experiment times the light. It didn't measure its frequency.
***************************


xuqut: It is not that the speed of light is not constant in space it is, It is that all objects are in motion and move relative to the constant speed of light. It should measure timing wise different values. Frequency comparisons are blind to this issue.

cinci: Neither the MMX or the experiment described in the article I posted were looking at frequency shifts. Michelson compared the time along two different paths and the article I posed actually measure teh speed of light one-way and two-way.

xuqut: How did they detect when the light reciever was hit?

cinci: Michelson wasn't measuring speed. He was comparing the time it took two rays of light to travers different paths and he was loking at interference patterns when he recombined the rays. Read his paper.
****************************

xuqut: Did they use the photo electric effect to trigger a recording of the time or did they use frequency and phase?

cinci: The photoelctric effect was discovered the same year Michelson did his experiment so no, he wasn't using it. I'm sure teh experiment in the article I posted was using some form of it. If you read the article they tell what equaipment they use to see the signal. It's a Lasermetrics diod of some sort. Read the article.
***********************

A light timer can only measure true time of the light strike by the photo electric effect.

cinci: Read the article.
***************

They did not use the photo electric effect.

This is the only way to implement a light timer with time.

Prove otherwise,wth your article.

Bring that maser logic out and I will show you it uses phase or frequency of the signal depending on the application.

Prove when light hit, time was recorded with the instruments.

[cincirob]

xuqut: They did not use the photo electric effect.

cinci: K smart guy, if you read the article, what piece of equipment did they use. I want the name of it. They are way beyond simple photelectric devices. Do you think you could time something in nanseconds with the electric eye in a garage door opener? They time the light signal just as i sad they did. Prove otherwise.
******************************

xuqut: This is the only way to implement a light timer with time. Prove otherwise,wth your article.

cinci: I don't have to prove anything It's all in the article. You haven't read it.
*******************************

xuqut: Bring that maser logic out and I will show you it uses phase or frequency of the signal depending on the application.

cinci: They are using if for a clock. I don't care how they do it.
*****************************

xuqut: Prove when light hit, time was recorded with the instruments.

cinci: Prove anything it wasn't. It's all in the article. Do I have to read it to you?
***********************

[xuqut]

xuqut: They did not use the photo electric effect.

cinci: K smart guy, if you read the article, what piece of equipment did they use. I want the name of it. They are way beyond simple photelectric devices. Do you think you could time something in nanseconds with the electric eye in a garage door opener? They time the light signal just as i sad they did. Prove otherwise.
******************************

Now, this is funny. No, they used the eye of the oracle to time it.

I just know masers do frequency and phase comparisons.

I looked over the experiement and was quite disturbed not to see the to and frame timings if actual clocks were used. That should have been part of the data. Thast is what leads me to believe they were counting crests.

See, I already confess frequency is constant in the frame in all directions. Further, if you take that same frequency device at a different speed it will be roughly be the same frequency as in the "rest" frame except for that frequency adjustment you call time dilation. Yes, you can derive that adjustment by postulating frequency is constant in all directions in the frame with the use of doppler only and completely sans clocks.


The only way to count count of light travel is to use an electronic device to shoot the laser and record the time.

Then the reception must use only the photo exectric effect to record reception which drives a circuit and switches on a record device.

Otherwise, you are counting crests.

Do you know another way to count time without using the wave properties of light? Again, that will always produce a null result using equidistance. That has been proven at a much better level than these clowns.

[cincirob]

xuqut: Now, this is funny. No, they used the eye of the oracle to time it.

cinci: They tell youexactly what piece of equipment they use to time it. Obviously you have not read the article or you could name the piece of equipment.
**********************************

xuqut: I just know masers do frequency and phase comparisons.

cinci: Masers don't do anything but produce coherent microwave emission just like lasers don't do anything but produce coherent light. Because their frequency is very closely controlled you can do accurate phase comparisons but other pieces of equipment do the comparisons. Because they can be tuned to resonate at a very precise frequency they can be used as clocks and that is what they are used for in this experiment.
******************************************

xuqut: I looked over the experiement and was quite disturbed not to see the to and frame timings if actual clocks were used. That should have been part of the data. Thast is what leads me to believe they were counting crests.

cinci: Hydrogen maser clocks are actual clocks. Do you think you can do this experiment with a Big Ben alarm clock?
***********************************

xuqut: See, I already confess frequency is constant in the frame in all directions. Further, if you take that same frequency device at a different speed it will be roughly be the same frequency as in the "rest" frame except for that frequency adjustment you call time dilation. Yes, you can derive that adjustment by postulating frequency is constant in all directions in the frame with the use of doppler only and completely sans clocks.

cinci: You're just rambling. They did a very simple test there. They timed a light signal FROM A LASER round trip and they time the same signal one way and got the same speed both ways. They used hydrogen maser clocks to do the timing.
***************************

xuqut: The only way to count count of light travel is to use an electronic device to shoot the laser and record the time. Then the reception must use only the photo electric effect to record reception which drives a circuit and switches on a record device.

cinci: And that is exactly what they did. Prove otherwise.
**************************

xuqut: Otherwise, you are counting crests. Do you know another way to count time without using the wave properties of light? Again, that will always produce a null result using equidistance. That has been proven at a much better level than these clowns.

cinci: They didn't get a null result of anything. They recorded times. Read the article. If you want me to do your laser angle problem you're going to have to get this right. I'm not going to waste my time if you're just going to deny obvious facts.
*********************************

[xuqut]

xuqut: Now, this is funny. No, they used the eye of the oracle to time it.

cinci: They tell youexactly what piece of equipment they use to time it. Obviously you have not read the article or you could name the piece of equipment.
**********************************

They used masers.

But, what you have not yet shown is how they clocked it.

xuqut: I just know masers do frequency and phase comparisons.

cinci: Masers don't do anything but produce coherent microwave emission just like lasers don't do anything but produce coherent light. Because their frequency is very closely controlled you can do accurate phase comparisons but other pieces of equipment do the comparisons. Because they can be tuned to resonate at a very precise frequency they can be used as clocks and that is what they are used for in this experiment.
******************************************

I have already confessed the wave properties of light are the same in all directions.

We are talking about timing that is related to motion in the universe or timing that is triggered by the photo electric effect.

I have posted many articles that MMX (light wave property measurements) do not exclude Ritz's theory of light and hence they do not measure light as an absolute constant since the wave properties match the uniform motion of the frame.

You need a time counting device that does not depend on the wave properties.

xuqut: I looked over the experiement and was quite disturbed not to see the to and frame timings if actual clocks were used. That should have been part of the data. Thast is what leads me to believe they were counting crests.

cinci: Hydrogen maser clocks are actual clocks. Do you think you can do this experiment with a Big Ben alarm clock?
***********************************

I thought about using a sun dial.

xuqut: See, I already confess frequency is constant in the frame in all directions. Further, if you take that same frequency device at a different speed it will be roughly be the same frequency as in the "rest" frame except for that frequency adjustment you call time dilation. Yes, you can derive that adjustment by postulating frequency is constant in all directions in the frame with the use of doppler only and completely sans clocks.

cinci: You're just rambling. They did a very simple test there. They timed a light signal FROM A LASER round trip and they time the same signal one way and got the same speed both ways. They used hydrogen maser clocks to do the timing.
***************************

There are more accurate experiments that prove the wave properties match the uniform motion of the frame.

xuqut: Otherwise, you are counting crests. Do you know another way to count time without using the wave properties of light? Again, that will always produce a null result using equidistance. That has been proven at a much better level than these clowns.

cinci: They didn't get a null result of anything. They recorded times. Read the article. If you want me to do your laser angle problem you're going to have to get this right. I'm not going to waste my time if you're just going to deny obvious facts.
*********************************

They measured wave properties and proved the wave properties are constant in both directions.

I already agree.

The wave properties of light match the uniform motion of the frame such that they are constant in all directions in the frame.

[cincirob]

xuqut: They measured wave properties and proved the wave properties are constant in both directions. I already agree. The wave properties of light match the uniform motion of the frame such that they are constant in all directions in the frame.

cinci: Nope, they measrued the speed of light. I was able to find a version of their abstract that I could copy. Here it is:

Experimental comparison of time synchronization techniques by means of light signals and clock transport on the rotating earth

Author(s): Nelson, R. A.; Alley, C. O.; Rayner, J. D.; Shih, Y. H.; Steggerda, C. A.; Wang, B. C.; Agnew, B. W.

Abstract: An experiment was conducted to investigate the equivalence of two methods of time transfer in a noninertial reference frame: by means of an electromagnetic signal using laser light pulses and by means of the slow ground transport of a hydrogen maser atomic clock. The experiment may also be interpreted as an investigation of whether the one-way speeds of light in the east-west and west-east directions on the rotating earth are the same. The light pulses were sent from a laser coupled to a telescope at the NASA Goddard Optical Research Facility (GORF) in Greenbelt, Maryland to the U.S. Naval Observatory (USNO) in Washington, DC. The optical path was made possible by a 30-cm flat mirror on a water tower near GORF and a 25-cm flat mirror on top of the Washington National Cathedral near USNO. The path length was 26.0 km with an east-west component of 20.7 km. The pulses were reflected back over the same path by a portable array of corner cube reflectors. The transmission and return times were measured with a stationary Sigma Tau hydrogen maser and a University of Maryland event timer at GORF, while the times of reflection were measured with a similar maser and event timer combination carefully transported to USNO. Both timekeeping systems were housed in highly insulated enclosures and were maintained at
constant temperatures to within /- 0.1 C by microprocessor controllers. The portable system was also protected from shock and vibration by pneumatic supports. The difference delta(T) between the directly measured time of reflection according to the portable clock and the time of reflection calculated from the light pulse signal times measured by the stationary clock was determined. For a typical trip delta(T) is less than 100 ps and the corresponding limit on an anisotropy of the one-way speed of light is delta(c/c) is less than 1.5 x 10(exp -6). This the only experiment to date in which two atomic clocks were calibrated at one location, one was slowly transported to the other end of a path, and the times of transmission, reflection, and return of short light pulses sent in different directions along the path were registered.

Don't bother telling my you already agree when everything you've said disagrees with the underlined parts of the abstract. Now tell me again what you agree with.
*************

[xuqut]

xuqut: They measured wave properties and proved the wave properties are constant in both directions. I already agree. The wave properties of light match the uniform motion of the frame such that they are constant in all directions in the frame.

cinci: Nope, they measrued the speed of light. I was able to find a version of their abstract that I could copy. Here it is:

Experimental comparison of time synchronization techniques by means of light signals and clock transport on the rotating earth

Author(s): Nelson, R. A.; Alley, C. O.; Rayner, J. D.; Shih, Y. H.; Steggerda, C. A.; Wang, B. C.; Agnew, B. W.

Abstract: An experiment was conducted to investigate the equivalence of two methods of time transfer in a noninertial reference frame: by means of an electromagnetic signal using laser light pulses and by means of the slow ground transport of a hydrogen maser atomic clock. The experiment may also be interpreted as an investigation of whether the one-way speeds of light in the east-west and west-east directions on the rotating earth are the same. The light pulses were sent from a laser coupled to a telescope at the NASA Goddard Optical Research Facility (GORF) in Greenbelt, Maryland to the U.S. Naval Observatory (USNO) in Washington, DC. The optical path was made possible by a 30-cm flat mirror on a water tower near GORF and a 25-cm flat mirror on top of the Washington National Cathedral near USNO. The path length was 26.0 km with an east-west component of 20.7 km. The pulses were reflected back over the same path by a portable array of corner cube reflectors. The transmission and return times were measured with a stationary Sigma Tau hydrogen maser and a University of Maryland event timer at GORF, while the times of reflection were measured with a similar maser and event timer combination carefully transported to USNO. Both timekeeping systems were housed in highly insulated enclosures and were maintained at
constant temperatures to within /- 0.1 C by microprocessor controllers. The portable system was also protected from shock and vibration by pneumatic supports. The difference delta(T) between the directly measured time of reflection according to the portable clock and the time of reflection calculated from the light pulse signal times measured by the stationary clock was determined. For a typical trip delta(T) is less than 100 ps and the corresponding limit on an anisotropy of the one-way speed of light is delta(c/c) is less than 1.5 x 10(exp -6). This the only experiment to date in which two atomic clocks were calibrated at one location, one was slowly transported to the other end of a path, and the times of transmission, reflection, and return of short light pulses sent in different directions along the path were registered.

Don't bother telling my you already agree when everything you've said disagrees with the underlined parts of the abstract. Now tell me again what you agree with.
*************

Nope they are using the wave properties of light.

They must use something without the wave properties. Wave properties are tied to the uniform motion of the frame.


You see, it is quite simple, they confess the rough absolute motion of the earth is 30km/sec in the orbit around the sun in their article.

They said light is measured constant in speed in east west directions.

Hence, they have proven Ritz's theory of light.

The velocity v_ is the velocity of the source and v_(t − r/c) is the velocity of the source at the moment of emission. Equation (10) describes an expanding sphere whose center is no longer at rest in the coordinate system; if the source were to continue to move uniformly with velocity v_, it would remain the center of the sphere. This geometrical description was favored by Ritz.

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Einstein1905.pdf

Ritz's theory says light moves absolute c + 18.55 in the east direction and c - 18.55 in the eest direction.

But, since the earth is moving at 18.55, it will measure c in both directions.

Here is how.

If light is moving absolutely at 18.55 + c and the earth moves at 18.55, then while light moves (c+18.55)t, the earth moves (18.55)t.

Hence,

Let d be the distance for the experiment one way in the east direction.

So,

(c+18.55)t = d + (18.55)t.

(c+18.55)t - (18.55)t = d

(c+18.55-18.55)t = d

t = d/c.


Let d be the distance for the experiment one way in the west direction.

So,

(c-18.55)t = d - (18.55)t.

(c-18.55)t + (18.55)t = d

(c-18.55+18.55)t = d

t = d/c.

Well, what do you know, when the light speed matches the motion of the earth and rides with it, then it will always measure c given d and t.


You have just proven Ritz's theory of light.


But, Ritz's theory is inconsistent with Sagnac and tests from moving light sources.


You need to understand the difference between the wave properties of light which match the absolute motion of the frame and hence we cannot detect its absolute motion using light waves properties, and the mechanical speed of light that moves in space at one and only one speed and not c+v and c-v as Ritz's theory contends.

[cincirob]

You are hopleless. None of the nonsense is in their paper. They made a simple measurement of how long it takes light to go from one palce to another. Until you get that, I will waste no time on you.

[xuqut]

You are hopleless. None of the nonsense is in their paper. They made a simple measurement of how long it takes light to go from one palce to another. Until you get that, I will waste no time on you.

They measured the constant wave properties of light and nothing more.

The ysed a wave to compare to a wave. That is what their clocks are.

I also showed to you, if the experiments honbestly showdd what you claim, then light is not a absolute constant c.

I showed the proof above.

Feel free to prove light is constant in all directions on the earth moving through space at 30meters/s and yet an absolute constant in space.