#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #100 on: June 16, 2017, 11:32:44 AM »
Therefore and somesuch.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

• 7
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #101 on: June 19, 2017, 11:17:37 PM »

Just because you believe SR has been falsified by a misinterpretation of the Sagnac effect and a one-time, never reproducible result in the Michaelson-Morley experiment, doesn't make you correct.

The Sagnac experiment have 2 fases:
1 - 0 m/s plate rotation (stationary), Results: No interference found
2 - 2 m/s plate rotation (moving), Results: Detected interferences!!

This means that the light is independent from any inertial system then the SR is invalidated... sorry XD

The Michaelson-Morley experiment is the GREATEST (misinterpretated experiment) of all times but it's always reproducible

The Michaelson-Gale experiment is the right interpretation of the Michaelson-Morley experiment and it proves that the Earth is STATIONARY....

#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #102 on: June 20, 2017, 10:44:53 AM »
When the interference is detected in a Sagnac experiment you have a rotating frame which is... Non-inertial!  Looks like SR is not even relevant. Fortunately GR can explain the result.

Tell me, how the MM experiment should be interpreted. When you consider the observations of astronauts and satellites of the Earth's motion I think you must reconsider your silly conclusions.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

• 7
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #103 on: June 20, 2017, 12:45:18 PM »
When the interference is detected in a Sagnac experiment you have a rotating frame which is... Non-inertial!  Looks like SR is not even relevant. Fortunately GR can explain the result.

When the interference is NOT detected in the Sagnac experiment (when stationary) you have the rotating EARTH!!! which is even non-inertial system then ALSO in this case the SR is not even relevant. Un-Fortunately for you the GR theory is only crap.. xD

Tell me, how the MM experiment should be interpreted. When you consider the observations of astronauts and satellites of the Earth's motion I think you must reconsider your silly conclusions.

In the M-Gale experiment has been simulated the earth's angular-speed and in THAT case the interferences were DETECTED!!! (as born coordinates confirms) then if the EARTH is rotating the M-m experiments MUST have wrong results... try to research in the right way please....
« Last Edit: June 20, 2017, 12:54:34 PM by kromeader »

#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #104 on: June 20, 2017, 02:18:24 PM »
When the interference is detected in a Sagnac experiment you have a rotating frame which is... Non-inertial!  Looks like SR is not even relevant. Fortunately GR can explain the result.

When the interference is NOT detected in the Sagnac experiment (when stationary) you have the rotating EARTH!!! which is even non-inertial system then ALSO in this case the SR is not even relevant. Un-Fortunately for you the GR theory is only crap.. xD

Sorry this is tough for you. The Earth is it rotating with respect to the detector since their motion is identical, hence it is inertial. If you can't properly analyze an FOR, perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to discard the work of actual scientists.

Tell me, how the MM experiment should be interpreted. When you consider the observations of astronauts and satellites of the Earth's motion I think you must reconsider your silly conclusions.

In the M-Gale experiment has been simulated the earth's angular-speed and in THAT case the interferences were DETECTED!!! (as born coordinates confirms) then if the EARTH is rotating the M-m experiments MUST have wrong results... try to research in the right way please....
[/quote]

Considering how fundamentally and grievously flawed your thinking on Sagnac was, I'm not looking in to this yet.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

• 7
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #105 on: June 20, 2017, 06:35:54 PM »

The Earth is it rotating with respect to the detector since their motion is identical, hence it is inertial. If you can't properly analyze an FOR, perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to discard the work of actual scientists.

You wrong!!! The detector motion is ALWAYS different to the system motion where it is (You don't consider the motion of the earth around the sun it's equal to 30km/s and 1°/day as angular-speed) for this reasons it cant exists a "pure" inertial system in nature relativistically speaking (that's why the SR has been created).. the actual scientists work to cover up not for discover ... please wakeup

#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #106 on: June 20, 2017, 06:54:39 PM »
Alright, I wont bother trying to change your mind. Good luck out there.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

#### Tahj

##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #107 on: August 08, 2017, 04:19:04 AM »

Light from the moon's surface takes ~1.3 seconds to reach earth, so any given spot a telescope is aimed at is actually behind the true position by about 34.32 kilometers (1.3 * 26.4) due to lightspeed delay. If a laser is aimed there, it will also take ~1.3 seconds to reach the moon's surface and miss the spot it was aimed at by double that amount - 68.64 kilometers.

Note that not one single description of the LLR experiments mentions taking this distance offset into account.

Quick Google search finds a number of papers that include the distance offset

http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/bitstream/10150/288113/4/azu_td_7401993_sip1_w.pdf

See pages 26-27

#### freeemind

• 5
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #108 on: October 10, 2017, 11:34:45 PM »
When the interference is detected in a Sagnac experiment you have a rotating frame which is... Non-inertial!  Looks like SR is not even relevant. Fortunately GR can explain the result.

When the interference is NOT detected in the Sagnac experiment (when stationary) you have the rotating EARTH!!! which is even non-inertial system then ALSO in this case the SR is not even relevant. Un-Fortunately for you the GR theory is only crap.. xD

Tell me, how the MM experiment should be interpreted. When you consider the observations of astronauts and satellites of the Earth's motion I think you must reconsider your silly conclusions.

In the M-Gale experiment has been simulated the earth's angular-speed and in THAT case the interferences were DETECTED!!! (as born coordinates confirms) then if the EARTH is rotating the M-m experiments MUST have wrong results... try to research in the right way please....

Rotational Velocity IS a relevant factor but, with Diffraction and barring other encumbrances, returning photons at the detectors should still be possible.  The MAJOR factors which I believe to be insurmountable to the LLR experiments would be the Orbital Velocity of Earth around the Sun (30km/s), the Velocity of the Solar System through the Milky Way (220km/s) and the Velocity of the Milky Way through the Universe (600km/s).  If ANY of these velocities are even CLOSE to correct...  the laser pulse will never even hit the Moon at all unless the Moon is positioned either in front or behind the Earth relative to the direction of travel when the pulse is fired.  Even then, we would get dramatically different distancing results based on which of those 2 positions the Moon were occupying at the time.

#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #109 on: October 10, 2017, 11:40:38 PM »
When the interference is detected in a Sagnac experiment you have a rotating frame which is... Non-inertial!  Looks like SR is not even relevant. Fortunately GR can explain the result.

When the interference is NOT detected in the Sagnac experiment (when stationary) you have the rotating EARTH!!! which is even non-inertial system then ALSO in this case the SR is not even relevant. Un-Fortunately for you the GR theory is only crap.. xD

Tell me, how the MM experiment should be interpreted. When you consider the observations of astronauts and satellites of the Earth's motion I think you must reconsider your silly conclusions.

In the M-Gale experiment has been simulated the earth's angular-speed and in THAT case the interferences were DETECTED!!! (as born coordinates confirms) then if the EARTH is rotating the M-m experiments MUST have wrong results... try to research in the right way please....

Rotational Velocity IS a relevant factor but, with Diffraction and barring other encumbrances, returning photons at the detectors should still be possible.  The MAJOR factors which I believe to be insurmountable to the LLR experiments would be the Orbital Velocity of Earth around the Sun (30km/s), the Velocity of the Solar System through the Milky Way (220km/s) and the Velocity of the Milky Way through the Universe (600km/s).  If ANY of these velocities are even CLOSE to correct...  the laser pulse will never even hit the Moon at all unless the Moon is positioned either in front or behind the Earth relative to the direction of travel when the pulse is fired.  Even then, we would get dramatically different distancing results based on which of those 2 positions the Moon were occupying at the time.

Unfortunately you are not analyzing the FoR properly. The light emitted from the Earth will carry all the vectors that contribute to the Earth's motion.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

#### freeemind

• 5
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #110 on: October 13, 2017, 08:23:57 PM »
When the interference is detected in a Sagnac experiment you have a rotating frame which is... Non-inertial!  Looks like SR is not even relevant. Fortunately GR can explain the result.

When the interference is NOT detected in the Sagnac experiment (when stationary) you have the rotating EARTH!!! which is even non-inertial system then ALSO in this case the SR is not even relevant. Un-Fortunately for you the GR theory is only crap.. xD

Tell me, how the MM experiment should be interpreted. When you consider the observations of astronauts and satellites of the Earth's motion I think you must reconsider your silly conclusions.

In the M-Gale experiment has been simulated the earth's angular-speed and in THAT case the interferences were DETECTED!!! (as born coordinates confirms) then if the EARTH is rotating the M-m experiments MUST have wrong results... try to research in the right way please....

Rotational Velocity IS a relevant factor but, with Diffraction and barring other encumbrances, returning photons at the detectors should still be possible.  The MAJOR factors which I believe to be insurmountable to the LLR experiments would be the Orbital Velocity of Earth around the Sun (30km/s), the Velocity of the Solar System through the Milky Way (220km/s) and the Velocity of the Milky Way through the Universe (600km/s).  If ANY of these velocities are even CLOSE to correct...  the laser pulse will never even hit the Moon at all unless the Moon is positioned either in front or behind the Earth relative to the direction of travel when the pulse is fired.  Even then, we would get dramatically different distancing results based on which of those 2 positions the Moon were occupying at the time.

Unfortunately you are not analyzing the FoR properly. The light emitted from the Earth will carry all the vectors that contribute to the Earth's motion.

You say FoR..  Is that Frame of Reference?  Please clarify.  Are you implying that a light pulse fired from Earth to the Moon will have a travel path similar to that of a ball thrown sideways from a moving vehicle (albeit without the vertical arc)?  That would imply that light has mass, would it not?

#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #111 on: October 14, 2017, 01:01:32 AM »
Yes, apologies. FoR means frame of reference. For an observer on Earth, light would take a straight line path from the emitter to the moon. For an observer in a different perspective the light may indeed appear to curve. In this case, the acceleration would be coordinate acceleration though, and not proper acceleration and does not require anything other than a non-inertial FoR.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

#### freeemind

• 5
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #112 on: October 15, 2017, 05:41:05 AM »
Yes, apologies. FoR means frame of reference. For an observer on Earth, light would take a straight line path from the emitter to the moon. For an observer in a different perspective the light may indeed appear to curve. In this case, the acceleration would be coordinate acceleration though, and not proper acceleration and does not require anything other than a non-inertial FoR.

I appreciate the clarification.  I will explore this further as you have piqued my interest!

#### freeemind

• 5
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #113 on: October 21, 2017, 12:08:05 AM »
Yes, apologies. FoR means frame of reference. For an observer on Earth, light would take a straight line path from the emitter to the moon. For an observer in a different perspective the light may indeed appear to curve. In this case, the acceleration would be coordinate acceleration though, and not proper acceleration and does not require anything other than a non-inertial FoR.

It is apparent that a beam of light will bend exactly as a body would if thrown horizontally with a velocity equal to that of light...  but only in a gravitational
field.  In the 240k mile (approx) vacuum of space between Earth and the Moon, there would be no horizontal travel arc at all.  Therefore, in the 1.3 sec it takes to reach the Moon, the Moon will have traveled 780km through space (using 600k km/s speed of Milky Way).  Thoughts?

#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #114 on: October 21, 2017, 11:53:23 AM »
First, the path of light can bend between any two noninertial FORs. Second, the Earth is hurtling through the Milky Way at precisely the same speed as the moon, the sun and all the other objects under the sun's gravitational influence and can therefore be ignored.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

#### Lord Dave

• 7116
• Grumpy old man.
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #115 on: October 21, 2017, 06:16:00 PM »
Yeah, I mean, if photons ignored Frame of Reference stuff like that, then any laser you fired would always be off.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

#### Rama Set

• 9849
• Round and round...
##### Re: "Lunar Laser Ranging" (LLR) is a LIE and HOAX - The Simple PROOF
« Reply #116 on: October 21, 2017, 11:34:57 PM »
Yeah, I mean, if photons ignored Frame of Reference stuff like that, then any laser you fired would always be off.

Exactly, the speed of light is constant, not the vector.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.