Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Koorosh Shahdaei: on 3/13/17 at 20:13pm UTC, wrote Dera Vladimir, Thank you Indeed for your comments, regarding your question...

Vladimir Tamari: on 3/13/17 at 8:11am UTC, wrote Dear Koorosh You have described your proposal well. Question: having the...

Héctor Gianni: on 3/11/17 at 23:43pm UTC, wrote Dear Koorosh Shadaei I invite you and every physicist to read my work...

Koorosh Shahdaei: on 3/8/17 at 19:33pm UTC, wrote Dear Eckard, I will have a look at your essay. Kind Regards Koorosh

Koorosh Shahdaei: on 3/8/17 at 19:32pm UTC, wrote Dear Vladimir, Thank you for your comments, very interesting point of...

Eckard Blumschein: on 3/8/17 at 17:26pm UTC, wrote Dear Koorosh, On page 7 of my essay "Towards more reasonable evolution" I...

Vladimir Fedorov: on 3/8/17 at 13:47pm UTC, wrote Dear Koorosh, Sorry, the previous message does not work links. I expose...

Vladimir Fedorov: on 3/8/17 at 11:54am UTC, wrote Dear Koorosh, Your work to develop a compact meter of variations in the...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

leonae gonzales: "This seems to be very interesting site. Professionally i am a writer at the..." in Quantum Replicants:...

James Putnam: "Quoting Gary D. Simpson: "If you disapprove of one-bombing and wish to..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Steven Andresen: "It might be that I have come to know where the hidden variable is, to..." in 80 Years of EPR —...

Lawrence Crowell: "The choice for anonymous commenting is a good idea. A person scoring less..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

dieu le: "The Creation of Momentum From the gigantic Milky Way Galaxy to the..." in Alternative Models of...

dieu le: "What causes Things Move in Universe? Things move when encountering a..." in Alternative Models of...

leonae gonzales: "I would like to prepare a review of this topic with the help of research..." in Quantum Replicants:...

Thewitcher: "Đến với dịch vụ chữ ký số giachukyso.net bạn sẽ được..." in Riding the Rogue Quantum...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

The Spacetime Revolutionary
Carlo Rovelli describes how black holes may transition to "white holes," according to loop quantum gravity, a radical rewrite of fundamental physics.

Riding the Rogue Quantum Waves
Could giant sea swells help explain how the macroscopic world emerges from the quantum microworld? (Image credit: MIT News)

Rescuing Reality
A "retrocausal" rewrite of physics, in which influences from the future can affect the past, could solve some quantum quandaries—saving Einstein's view of reality along the way.


FQXi FORUM
March 23, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Measuring speed of light emitted by a moving frame by Koorosh Shahdaei [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

This essay's rating: Community = 3.0; Public = 1.0


Author Koorosh Shahdaei wrote on Mar. 1, 2017 @ 20:07 GMT
Essay Abstract

At first glans, this paper would be off-topic, but it would hopefully contribute to physical science as it suggests novel methods for measuring speed of light emitted from moving objects. Speed of light has been measured by various methods and to current knowledge is believed to be constant. These techniques include accurately known measurement methods of the day; e.g. cavity resonator, radio and laser interferometry etc. and are persistently revised. Despite the fact that there exists some controversy regarding the limit of speed of light, but there also methods like FEL (A free-electron laser or FEL, is a type of laser whose lasing medium consists of very-high-speed electrons moving freely through a magnetic structure). Proposed method is based on a conception of measuring the speed of light from a moving frame which according to the principal of special relativity would be a constant quantity in vacuum and is independent of the frame and its relative velocity whether the light is received or emitted. In spite of the theoretical part i.e. relativity and Doppler Effect and the fact that Michelson and Morley experiment doesn’t measure the speed of light directly, this method suggests an applied measurement which needs to be tested. In addition another method based on fringe shift is suggested on a rotating Michelson-Morley platform. In fact the Sagnac effect has already shown a non-null result [1] as it is done on a rotational platform, but this method is somewhat different as one of the mirrors has a slower linear/angular velocity then the other one.

Author Bio

MSc.Engineering Physics, MBA, IT-Security, Innovator, Member of Swedish Physical Society

Download Essay PDF File




Andrew R. Scott wrote on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 14:18 GMT
"At first glans (sic), this paper would be off-topic"

At a second, third and all further glances too, frankly.

report post as inappropriate

Author Koorosh Shahdaei replied on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 14:41 GMT
Thanks for ye comment




Branko L Zivlak wrote on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 14:57 GMT
Dear Mr. Shandaei

The speed of light is the limit. The limit we can measure approximately.

It is best to stay exact value by convention.

Best regards,

Branko Zivlak

report post as inappropriate


Author Koorosh Shahdaei wrote on Mar. 2, 2017 @ 15:12 GMT
Dear Mr. Zivlak,

You are right its about approximation, but the point here is, another method of truly make the measurements from moving frames not involving L-symmetry and relativity.

Kind Regards

Koorosh




Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 12:25 GMT
Dear Koorosh,

Very interesting ideas that confirm the need to find a more reliable knowledge base, its limits. And what is the ontological structure of light?

Sincerely, Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Koorosh Shahdaei replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 12:39 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

This is one of interesting subjects, and really researcher have been putting lot of effort for different type of measurements, I hope one day we can acquire much more information about light.

Warm Regards

Koorosh



Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 3, 2017 @ 14:10 GMT
Wave-vortex structure? Valery Pakulin: Structure of Matter / The vortex model of the microworld / ch. 3.3 page 42)

report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Mar. 4, 2017 @ 11:00 GMT
Valeriy Pakulin Structure of Matter

report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 07:01 GMT
Hi Shahdaei,

Nice suggestion on a new method of measurement of light.

Your proposed experiment is good. You said… ” An emitting source of light (emitting frame) which is the moving frame has a relative uniform velocity v with respect to the stationary frame. The measuring frame which comprising of measuring devices, is stationary relative to the emitting frame. Furthermore the...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Koorosh Shahdaei replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 19:16 GMT
Dear Satyavarapu,

Thanks for your comment, as a matter of fact as you mentioned about curvature, this regards all experiments that we do, as vi, our solarsystem and our galaxy all are rotating but we have approximate linearity that works good an small distances, I hope i could answer your questions. I'll proceed to your paper shortly.

Kind regards

Koorosh




Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 16:43 GMT
Dear Koorosh Shahdaei,



Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate

Author Koorosh Shahdaei replied on Mar. 7, 2017 @ 19:21 GMT
Dear Joe,

Thank you for your comments, my view is although we observe a complex world, but I think underneath it is much more simple that we can't really comprehend as we only kan comprehend part of the real universe.

Kind regards

Koorosh




Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 11:54 GMT
Dear Koorosh,

Your work to develop a compact meter of variations in the speed of light is an interesting and important work.

I did not accidentally write about variations in the speed of light, because for the time being almost no one understands that during the measurement of the speed of light, the luminiferous medium moves with a very large variance of the speed of motion, due...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Nikolaevich Fedorov wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 13:47 GMT
Dear Koorosh,

Sorry, the previous message does not work links. I expose the message a second time.

Your work to develop a compact meter of variations in the speed of light is an interesting and important work.

I did not accidentally write about variations in the speed of light, because for the time being almost no one understands that during the measurement of the speed of...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate

Author Koorosh Shahdaei replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 19:32 GMT
Dear Vladimir,

Thank you for your comments, very interesting point of view, actually you looked at the device from another point of view, and this type of brain storming is very enlightening.

I wish you success in your essay.

Kind Regards

Koorosh




Eckard Blumschein wrote on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 17:26 GMT
Dear Koorosh,

On page 7 of my essay "Towards more reasonable evolution" I argued for the one-way definition of the speed of light in vacuum. I am ready to defend this view.

My first posting, directed to all, was deleted, perhaps it was reported as inappropriate.

Regards,

Eckard Blumschein

report post as inappropriate

Author Koorosh Shahdaei replied on Mar. 8, 2017 @ 19:33 GMT
Dear Eckard,

I will have a look at your essay.

Kind Regards

Koorosh




Héctor Daniel Gianni wrote on Mar. 11, 2017 @ 23:43 GMT
Dear Koorosh Shadaei

I invite you and every physicist to read my work “TIME ORIGIN,DEFINITION AND EMPIRICAL MEANING FOR PHYSICISTS, Héctor Daniel Gianni ,I’m not a physicist.

How people interested in “Time” could feel about related things to the subject.

1) Intellectuals interested in Time issues usually have a nice and creative wander for the unknown.

2) They usually enjoy this wander of their searches around it.

3) For millenniums this wander has been shared by a lot of creative people around the world.

4) What if suddenly, something considered quasi impossible to be found or discovered such as “Time” definition and experimental meaning confronts them?

5) Their reaction would be like, something unbelievable,… a kind of disappointment, probably interpreted as a loss of wander…..

6) ….worst than that, if we say that what was found or discovered wasn’t a viable theory, but a proved fact.

7) Then it would become offensive to be part of the millenary problem solution, instead of being a reason for happiness and satisfaction.

8) The reader approach to the news would be paradoxically adverse.

9) Instead, I think it should be a nice welcome to discovery, to be received with opened arms and considered to be read with full attention.

11)Time “existence” is exclusive as a “measuring system”, its physical existence can’t be proved by science, as the “time system” is. Experimentally “time” is “movement”, we can prove that, showing that with clocks we measure “constant and uniform” movement and not “the so called Time”.

12)The original “time manuscript” has 23 pages, my manuscript in this contest has only 9 pages.

I share this brief with people interested in “time” and with physicists who have been in sore need of this issue for the last 50 or 60 years.

Héctor

Koorosh

report post as inappropriate


Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 08:11 GMT
Dear Koorosh

You have described your proposal well. Question: having the emitter on a rocket moving at velocity v will introduce Doppler shifts in the wavelength. Why a moving emitter at all?

In my theory of light moving through a discrete universal ether at a maximum speed c Beautiful Universe Theory n pure vacuume, but at slower speeds in gravitational or otherwise energized fields, c would be faster on the Space Station than c measured on Earth. Or would it ? Since clocks would give slower time? Needs thinking out by experts!

Good luck

Vladimir

report post as inappropriate

Author Koorosh Shahdaei replied on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 20:13 GMT
Dera Vladimir,

Thank you Indeed for your comments, regarding your question about Doppler effect as you mentioned, Doppler effect will happen in our case, but in this method vi are not concerned about it, we only measure the time difference which in our particular case does not involving neither SR nor Doppler effect. The reason I proposing a moving frame, it a novel way of measuring the speed of light from truly moving objects as e.g. MMX doesn't measure speed of light but just measuring fringe shift instead.

Regarding the speed of light on the space station, as I suggested one could calibrate the device as "c" would be measured when the frames are at rest with respect to each other, in this way have vi eliminated what you mentioned about possible energized fields that would impact "c".

I hope, this could clarify your questions more.

Kind Regards

Koorosh




Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'O' and 'Q':


Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.