/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9784243

hey guys, should I have a bean burrito for lunch, or eggs?

>>9784266
Why not both, your BRAAAAAAAAAPs will be glorious.

>>9784243
Nope, light is wave packets in the electromagnetic field, and electromagnetism shows quite clearly that EM waves must have constant speed in every reference frame. This is a basic discovery that predates special relativity, and you can't use a misunderstood version of special relativity to disprove it.

I used the standard proof of the relativistic time dilation.

>>9784302
You jumped rather bizarrely from a perfectly valid derivation of the lorentz factor to a nonsensical conclusion. You really, really should look into how people keep track of which reference frame they're in when doing relativistic calculations to make sure you don't fill your work with errors.

>>9784302
>standard proof of the relativistic time dilation
The standard proof explicitly MAKES THE ASSUMPTION THAT c IS CONSTANT FOR ALL OBSERVERS. Get out.

>>9784324
see picture N3
l < l0
The length traveled by light decreased for a stationary man.

>>9784330
>>9784337

>>9784243
Your second diagram is nonsense, now that I look at it. Lengths contract in the direction of motion, not perpendicular to it.

>>9784343
Put on your glasses.

>>9784347
There is no Lorentz contraction of length here.

Here is a light clock that has only a height.
The object moves from left to right.

>>9784243
Oh hey it’s you again.
Neat concept guy here

It is already firmly established that light does indeed move at a constant speed regardless of reference frame. And so oncemore, to make such a huge claim you’ll need lots of evidence.

You kind of remind me of a younger me. I would dabble and come up with math problems and then extrapolate nonsensical answers and try to use them as proof. And time and time again I was often wrong or half wrong. I never stopped to rigorously extrapolate the consequences of my “proof” nor did I seek out evidence to support my claims. I just fixated on my derivation. I’ve now come to see that a while versed mathematician should first play and compare the conclusions of their theories to ensure their validity. And you should do the same too

That being said it’s great that you’re thinking and attempting new things. And if you keep at it I’m sure you’ll discover something first, before others. And if not you’ll at least be great at your craft

Just work on making your arguments more concrete

>>9784243
So how can we test your theory?

>>9784355
Good post

>>9783021
what's with all of these constants threads
constants don't exist, only change does

>>9784243
Киpилл, ничeгo нe пoнял. Haдo нa pyccкoм.

>>9784374
бpo, извини, тoлькo нa инглишe cдeлaл.

Кopoчe, кoгдa вce дeлaют эти pиcyнки, вce дyмaют, чтo выcoтa cвeтoвых чacoв измeняeтcя, нo нa дeлe, выcoтa-тo чacoв ocтaлacь пpeжднeй, a вoт cвeт пpoшёл мeньшee paccтoяниe.

Кopoчe, длинa пpoйдeннoгo cвeтoм пyти coкpaтилacь.
T.e. oтнocитeльнo нaшeгo вpeмeни cкopocть cвeтa yпaлa.

Bыхoдит, чтo cкopocть cвeтa oтнocитeльнa, a нe кoнcтaнтa.

>>9784393
Hy, cпacибo и нa этoм. Хoтя и этo тyгoвaтo дoхoдит - я нe физик. B любoм cлyчae ycпeхoв тeбe, oбcyди тeмy c нayчным pyкoвoдитeлeм, мoжeт, cтaтью cтaтью в кaкoм-нибyдь жypнaлe yдacтcя oпyбликoвaть.

Good luck, Kirill Dubovitskiy.

>>9784355
Everyone thinks that the length of the light clock decreases, but the length of this object does not change. The length of the objects does not change in this axis.
In fact, it's a completely different thing.

The light does not have time to reach the end.
Because the speed of light has decreased.

>>9784416
И тeбe вceгo хopoшeгo, Aнoним.
Ho ты нe пpинимaй вcё, кaк ecть. Этo вeдь гипoтeзы... ;)

>>9784426
У Эйнштeйнa тoжe были oдни гипoтeзы, пoкa дpyгиe дядьки чepeз дecятилeтия нe cтaли их пoдтвepждaть нa пpaктикe. Кcтaти, мнoгoe дo cих пop ocтaётcя лишь в тeopии нa ypoвнe гипoтeз.
Taк дepжaть.
Good bye.

>>9784445
bye

v=c Complete absence of radiation from the system = absolutely black body.
This thing can not exist in reality.
For now...

Consequently, the "Relativistic Tempereture Decrease" is the correct work.
>>9777788

Thanks to that work, everyone now knows that the speed of light is not a constant.

In the beginning, I thought that the speed of light would not decrease... :)

>it's this retard again
Haven't you learned your lesson? Or is your IQ actually that low?
Oh wait, I know the answer to that.

v -> c
All processes inside the moving object are slowed down.

But we will not see this instantly.
We will not even see this at the speed of light.

While the light moves inside the moving object, the speed of light is less than "c".

From the black body, the light will never come out.

This is far from all effects.

>>9784243
>>9784337
>>9784338
>>9784347
>>9784351
>>9784354
>>9784393
>>9784421
>>9784426
>>9784450
>>9784476
>>9784501
An outstanding contribution for mankind in the field of Physics
You deserve the Nobel Prize in Physics
Everyone vote Kirill

>>9784528
gotts my vote

Troll in other places.

>>9784243
>they told me never to jump between frames without a transformation
>FUCK YOU MOM C ISNT REAL

>>9784528
Light doesn't slow down in a black hole, the spacetime geodesics ("straight" lines in curved space) turn inwards.

>>9784545
And you were there?

Is there v = c?
Such an object can not exist in the universe.

>>9784541
You do?

We are talking about the ordinary mother, and not about electromagnetic and gravitational waves.

We are talking about ordinary matter, and not about electromagnetic and gravitational waves.

sor Google Translate ;)))

bye

v = c
Nothing can penetrate such a system.
Even an object without a rest mass.

just music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4jiPbeARUI

holy fuck not this shit again

>>9784372
https://twitter.com/kiridu1988/status/1002986665130983424

Sorry!!!

This is not an absolutely "black body".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body

>>9784601
Holy fuck the pseud levels are off the charts

>>9784530
This

>>9784617
It is impossible to penetrate this object and it is impossible to get out of this object.

I will call it "Dubovitsky Object".

Bceлeннaя вepoятнo являeтcя пoдмнoжecтвoм oбъeктa Дyбoвицкoгo.

>>9784634
Never name things after yourself, especially when you haven't checked if someone else made it up before you. Everything that's been named after a physicist was named to honor them, not by them.

The universe is probably a subset of the "Dubovitsky Object".

>>9784639
blah blah blah
I know all this better than you.
but thx you

"Dubovitskiy Object" fixed

new version, I fixed several bugs

If the speed of light is relative...
This speed can increase...
v > c hmmm...

>>9784243
I wasn't going to break out the actual mathematics, but because you're being an arrogant prick, here you go. Now sit down and shut up when you're called out on your bullshit.

>>9784243
using a theory which was derived to adjust for a constant speed of light, we derive the conclusion that the speed of light is not constant.
>>9784355
this person says something very smart

>>9784882
ban this troll, please

>>9784940
>Algebraically showing that the theory is consistent with its own axioms
>Trolling

>>9784355
I do not care about the rules.
I hate this system.
I will do what I want.

And you will never go beyond.
Tвoй лимит - твoй пpигoвop.

>>9784266

>>9784266 is right. you should have both, it's what einstein would have done.

>>9784885
You do not understand anything, like the rest of the people.

This is the simplest task, just look at it carefully.

Close your eyes.
Forget about theories of relativity, forget that the speed of light is a constant.
Now open your eyes and read this work again.

>>9784961
Read the first two parts.
Then mentally increase the object's speed.
What do you see?
Draw a picture.
bye

>>9784954
You're the one who hasn't understood shit. The entire point of time dilation is for the speed of light to be invariant, and if you've transformed a system so a process happens completely differently, you're doing it INCREDIBLY wrong

Dude but what if we were already going the speed of light then turned on a flashlight?

You are very arrogant and have somehow convinced yourself that your theory is correct, despite all the people around you telling you otherwise. you're so delusional and think you are smarter than anyone else. Also pic related: it is what you have to do

>>9784243
another dumb ass fucking basedboy doing his "proof-by-shitpost" method that is going to revolutionize the world as we know it

last time i was here it was p=np anon

>>9784965
>>9784961
>>9784954
>>9784948
hell yeah dude stick it to the man

show these anons TRUE science and DONT see a therapist

>>9785082
>skeptics

>>>/reddit/

>>9785102
hell yeah dude this is 4chan scientific method is for s o y drinkers

/thread /x/

>>9784940
kys you fag.

The increase in mass and the compression of the length of light.

Interactions at atomic level happen at speed of light. Accelerating decreases the relative "speed" of electrons, as their translation in space is governed by c.
that's what time dilation is

>>9784243

Found your error:
if t1 goes to t it follows that ct1=ct.

you just confused yourself.

no trolls

I have already discovered much more, but I need time to draw.

>>9786206
Light traveled a short distance instead of a long one.
But no one wants to see this.

>>9786294
You keep dismissing everyone who points out flaws in your theory as trolls. This is supremely arrogant. Just like the guy with the propulsionless drive, your ego divided by your competence is approaching infinity.

For everyone who is inside a moving object, the light outside has speed > c.

>>9786309
Nope.

>>9786300
did you even read my comment ?

>>9786206
I wrote why the length of l0 decreases, and why it can not grow or remain constant.

>>9786316
dude if t1=t
then l0 = const.
thats all there is to it.

>>9786316
Lengths do indeed contract in relativity. Meanwhile, time dilates. In total, the exact rates at which they do are EXPLICITLY DESIGNED to keep c constant for all reference frames. That's the entire point.

>>9786326
ehh sorry
>if t1=t
then l0=l

>>9786328
t1>t0>t

>>9786345
Sorry i dont think your asumption is valid in general, while my argument must hold if you look at your graphic. with my argument in place, your thingy doesnt make sense.

The measured speed of light and the measured gravity constant g are all over the place. Look up banned ted talk.
The theoretical light speed is constant via webers force law in telational mechanics which predates relativity.
Weber was the first to show lights theoretical speed which is the square root of the ratio of the weber position force of electrostatics to the weber velocity force of magnetism. Weber named light speed with a lower letter c. Weber discovered maxwells wave equation, and proved light is an em wave
Your welcome

>>9786361
At the speed of light tge weber velocity firce equals the weber position force, and the ratio is unity thus v equals c.

>>9786365
>>9786361
w0t?
I do not understand.

relational ok

>>9786406
He's saying that the idea of a constant speed of light comes from electromagnetic wave equations, which was developed before special relativity

That's the point, we KNOW the speed of light has to be constant because otherwise electromagnetism breaks down.

>>9786425
If the speed of light is constant, then the time dilation breaks down.

c = God

>>9786713
No, if the speed of light is constant, time dilation works exactly as it's supposed to because that's the point of time dilation.

I will not say it again. All for now.

>>9786361
Does it even make sense to say a dimensionful constant varies over space?

>>9786796
G=graviton frequency^2/graviton density

> Energy=[(G*d)^1/2]*hbar
> Energy=[(G*d)^1/2]*e^2*z0
> Energy=[(G*d)^1/2]*e^2/e0*c
> Energy=[(G*d)^1/2]*e^2*u0*c
> Energy=[(G*d)^1/2]*h*2alpha

> mass=[(G*d)^1/2]*hbar/c^2
> mass=[(G*d)^1/2]*e^2*z0/c^2
> mass=[(G*d)^1/2]*e^2/e0*c^3
> mass=[(G*d)^1/2]*e^2*u0/c
> mass=[(G*d)^1/2]*h*2alpha/c^2

c^1=power/force
c^2=Energy/mass
c^3=G*(graviton flow rate)
c^4=force*G
c^5=power*G
c^6=(G^2)*(graviton frequency^2)
c^7=2018 Jun 21st 10:07:007 UTC

> frequency=(G*d)^1/2
> force=[(G*d)^1/2]*momentum
> Energy=[(G*d)^1/2]*hbar
> power=[(G*d)^1/2]*energy
> current=[(G*d)^1/2]*charge

> Energy=hbar*frequency
> Energy=mass*c^2
> Energy=hbar*[(G*d)^1/2]
> Energy=h*frequency
> Energy=h*[(G*d)^1/2]

https://days.to/until/21-june
G = God

The 7 Seals by David Koresh

c^1=power/force
c^2=Energy/mass
c^3=G*(graviton flow rate)
c^4=force*G
c^5=power*G
c^6=(G^2)*(graviton frequency^2)
c^7=2018 Jun 21st 10:07:007 UTC

What is the 7th Seal?

How does /sci/ attract even more schizos than even /x/? I don't understand.