you need at least a movie of the manufacture of the camera taking a photo of the photographer taking the picture to prove anything - this infinitely regressive thinking can be a boatload of fun, but don't we have better things to do?
oh, yeah, I just looked at my newsfeed - I guess we really to need this diversion from the real world
To further what you say, I think CU Boulder's Strontium clock can tell if it's on a lab bench or the floor.
Ain't physics great!?
Dunno if I agree with the "anyone can repeat the experiment for themselves," given the complexity of the engineering, but I get what you mean. 🙂
Edit -- what kind of corrections must LIGO perform for Earth curvature? 1 km legs with that level of control is WELL within the range where that would be a major part of the laser alignment.
Last edited:
1KM isn't much, but could make difference. 8cm, I think.
Curvature tests are generally done over a distance of 8-10km where the drop is very noticable
Curvature tests are generally done over a distance of 8-10km where the drop is very noticable
Very different scope of problems, Pano, given the precision needed for LIGO. 🙂 If this were a visual problem, I agree entirely. (and if one does the trig to realize how high up and wide a field of view you need to be to really see clear curvature, it's not trivial from an international flight at 40,000 ft up)
It's 4km and I never asked, but I was told the proposal to do a much larger version which would need care. BTW I think you can rent a clock from Agilent that can do the experiment maybe over a larger distance.
Local deviations from sphericity are a confounder in all this, you can't see the other shore of Lake Michigan OTOH it's big enough to have tides. I've lost track do the flat earthers deny gravity?
Ah, mea culpa.
And, yeah, there's a couple discontinued Agilent/Keysight Cesium clocks that are in the range needed as well.
No, no, no!
It is turtles ALL the way down.
I saw that on QI and Stephen Fry wouldn't lie!
In fact we are not on a disk on the back of a turtle but we live directly on the uppermost turtles back.
This accounts for the observable curvature.
Also explains why 'oil' doesn't run out, it is really turtle blood. Main reason we need to get into renewables: When the turtle finds somewhere to scratch itself we are screwed!
No need to restrict to "visual"
Radar guys must acknowledge Earth´s curvature or else:
Mmmmmhhh, is Earth RADIUS a factor in this equation?
Arethey talking about a TANGENT to the Earth?
Would Radius and Tangent have any meaning on a flat surface?
TV (and VHF/UHF/Microwave communications) guys have this problem:
Most important: no cameras, lenses or weak instruments as eyes are involved, two antennas (transmitting and receiving) either "see" each other or they don´t (as in being below the Horizon).
RF receiving equipment is hugely sensitive, so "just distance" is not the main problem.
Planes on airports who can not communicate to each other while on the ground, *easily* do so over far greater distances once they are flying high. Why?
Wonder why marine Communications pople, to which this is vital, waste time on all this "nonsense" calcuating reliable communications distance.
Wonder why they all assign such an importance to antenna *height*
Radar guys must acknowledge Earth´s curvature or else:
And what is the Geometry involved?
Mmmmmhhh, is Earth RADIUS a factor in this equation?
Arethey talking about a TANGENT to the Earth?
Would Radius and Tangent have any meaning on a flat surface?
TV (and VHF/UHF/Microwave communications) guys have this problem:
Most important: no cameras, lenses or weak instruments as eyes are involved, two antennas (transmitting and receiving) either "see" each other or they don´t (as in being below the Horizon).
RF receiving equipment is hugely sensitive, so "just distance" is not the main problem.
Planes on airports who can not communicate to each other while on the ground, *easily* do so over far greater distances once they are flying high. Why?
Wonder why marine Communications pople, to which this is vital, waste time on all this "nonsense" calcuating reliable communications distance.
Wonder why they all assign such an importance to antenna *height*
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I have no idea what you just said. How many turtles are involved?Gravitonic effect of substrates of various molecules in various states
Radio isn't all line of sight. If it were, I'd have a lot of trouble getting reception in my car.
I've picked up Kauai FM radio at 310m above sea level on the Big Island. The transmitter was 445km away. The antenna would need to be at 11300m for it to be line of sight to my car. (on a round earth) Nothing that tall in Kauai. 😉
I've picked up Kauai FM radio at 310m above sea level on the Big Island. The transmitter was 445km away. The antenna would need to be at 11300m for it to be line of sight to my car. (on a round earth) Nothing that tall in Kauai. 😉
- Status
- Not open for further replies.