Is such a thing even possible?

On Friday, 29 September 2023 at 13:33:11 UTC+2, Alan B wrote:
> Is such a thing even possible?

"perfect" as a general rule means - no,
not possible. There are exceptions, but
rarely.

On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
> Is such a thing even possible?

I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!

On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 07:31:24 UTC+2, Volney wrote:
> On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
> > Is such a thing even possible?
> I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!

Like you're sure that setting to 9 192 631 774
is setting to 9 192 631 770, which is "Newton
mode".

On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 06:31:24 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
> > Is such a thing even possible?
> I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!

Sensitivity maybe yes. But for MMX to be of any use
one has to be able rotate the table on its Mercury bed
to check if each arm gets the same reading both
n+S and E-W
You can’t rotate any of the arms at Hanford or Livingston
They always point the same direction.
So LIGO could never be a MMX device.

On 9/30/2023 4:59 AM, Lou wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 06:31:24 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
>> On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
>>> Is such a thing even possible?
>> I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!
>
> Sensitivity maybe yes. But for MMX to be of any use
> one has to be able rotate the table on its Mercury bed
> to check if each arm gets the same reading both
> n+S and E-W
> You can’t rotate any of the arms at Hanford or Livingston
> They always point the same direction.
> So LIGO could never be a MMX device.

They rotate with the earth.

On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 1:59:58 AM UTC-7, Lou wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 06:31:24 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> > On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
> > > Is such a thing even possible?
> > I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!
> Sensitivity maybe yes. But for MMX to be of any use
> one has to be able rotate the table on its Mercury bed
> to check if each arm gets the same reading both
> n+S and E-W
> You can’t rotate any of the arms at Hanford or Livingston
> They always point the same direction.
> So LIGO could never be a MMX device.

Is there any limit to your imbecility? This is a rhetorical question.

On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 16:52:39 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 9/30/2023 4:59 AM, Lou wrote:
> > On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 06:31:24 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> >> On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
> >>> Is such a thing even possible?
> >> I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!
> >
> > Sensitivity maybe yes. But for MMX to be of any use
> > one has to be able rotate the table on its Mercury bed
> > to check if each arm gets the same reading both
> > n+S and E-W
> > You can’t rotate any of the arms at Hanford or Livingston
> > They always point the same direction.
> > So LIGO could never be a MMX device.
> They rotate with the earth.

LIGO arms can’t rotate 90degrees, like the MMX arms do on the
Mercury bed in the original experiment.
Are you suggesting that if the Michelson Morley experimental setup
could not have been rotated on a Mercury bed....they could still have
confirmed a null result?
In that case..why did they bother with rotating the setup on a Mercury bed?

On 10/1/2023 8:52 AM, Lou wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 16:52:39 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
>> On 9/30/2023 4:59 AM, Lou wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 06:31:24 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
>>>>> Is such a thing even possible?
>>>> I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!
>>>
>>> Sensitivity maybe yes. But for MMX to be of any use
>>> one has to be able rotate the table on its Mercury bed
>>> to check if each arm gets the same reading both
>>> n+S and E-W
>>> You can’t rotate any of the arms at Hanford or Livingston
>>> They always point the same direction.
>>> So LIGO could never be a MMX device.
>> They rotate with the earth.
>
> LIGO arms can’t rotate 90degrees, like the MMX arms do on the
> Mercury bed in the original experiment.

LIGO rotates along with the earth, just like you've been whining about
the MMX for the last zillion or so posts. Wait 6 hours for a 90 degree
rotation.

> Are you suggesting that if the Michelson Morley experimental setup
> could not have been rotated on a Mercury bed....they could still have
> confirmed a null result?

It would have taken longer, but yes. Didn't they also wait 6 months to
capture the ether wind from the other direction?

> In that case..why did they bother with rotating the setup on a Mercury bed?

To get more useful readings in a shorter time.

I think the mercury was also used for isolation from vibrations.

On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 5:52:57 AM UTC-7, Lou wrote:

> LIGO arms can’t rotate 90degrees,

Dumb-du-ram-dumb

On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 8:35:04 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:
>
> On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 5:52:57 AM UTC-7, Lou wrote:
> >
> > LIGO arms can’t rotate 90degrees,
>
> Dumb-du-ram-dumb

I'm responding to this message only to keep it from getting buried
in the spam. Okay, a question: why does anyone respond to Lou?
He obviously has mental problems.

On Monday, 2 October 2023 at 03:29:40 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 10/1/2023 8:52 AM, Lou wrote:
> > On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 16:52:39 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> >> On 9/30/2023 4:59 AM, Lou wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 06:31:24 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> >>>> On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
> >>>>> Is such a thing even possible?
> >>>> I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!
> >>>
> >>> Sensitivity maybe yes. But for MMX to be of any use
> >>> one has to be able rotate the table on its Mercury bed
> >>> to check if each arm gets the same reading both
> >>> n+S and E-W
> >>> You can’t rotate any of the arms at Hanford or Livingston
> >>> They always point the same direction.
> >>> So LIGO could never be a MMX device.
> >> They rotate with the earth.
> >
> > LIGO arms can’t rotate 90degrees, like the MMX arms do on the
> > Mercury bed in the original experiment.
> LIGO rotates along with the earth, just like you've been whining about
> the MMX for the last zillion or so posts. Wait 6 hours for a 90 degree
> rotation.

The only rotation of the earth that the MMX could possibly measure is a
small amount of rotation that occurs as the setup rotates slightly over the
time the light takes to go out and back on LIGO arms vs the 1600k/ hour
rotational speed of the LIGO arms in that same ns time frame.
How exactly is earths rotational speed of 1600/k/hour going to change
Over any of the 24 hours it takes the earth to do a full rotation?
It’s always rotating at 1600k/hour. All day long.

In other words the Time of flight on either of the two LIGO arms
NEVER changes during earths rotation. The difference in path speeds
is *between* the 2 arms. Where one arm always faces the EW direction
of rotation compared to the other arm always facing N-S
LIGO could never be an MMX.
You relativists are SO stupid.

> > Are you suggesting that if the Michelson Morley experimental setup
> > could not have been rotated on a Mercury bed....they could still have
> > confirmed a null result?
> It would have taken longer, but yes. Didn't they also wait 6 months to
> capture the ether wind from the other direction?

Wrong. The experiment was only conducted for *at most* 4 months.
(Wiki)”The MMX experiment was performed between April and July
1887 by American physicists Michelson and Morley.”

> > In that case..why did they bother with rotating the setup on a Mercury bed?
> To get more useful readings in a shorter time.
>
> I think the mercury was also used for isolation from vibrations.

And as far as your fantasy that the experiment does not need to be rotated in
the lab to detect a change in the interference pattern.... As usual, for a fact
free delusional relativist, you are completely wrong.
It does need to be rotated in the lab to see if there is a fringe change when
the arms change from being parallel to perpendicular to the
expected “aether wind”

(Wiki) ”The mercury trough allowed the device to turn with close to zero friction, so that once having given the sandstone block a single push it would slowly rotate through the entire range of possible angles to the "aether wind", while measurements were continuously observed by looking through the eyepiece. The hypothesis of aether drift implies that because one of the arms would inevitably turn into the direction of the wind at the same time that another arm was turning perpendicularly to the wind, an effect should be noticeable even over a period of minutes.
The expectation was that the effect would be graphable as a sine wave with two peaks and two troughs per rotation of the device. This result could have been expected because during each full rotation, each arm would be parallel to the wind twice (facing into and away from the wind giving identical readings) and perpendicular to the wind twice.”

On Monday, 2 October 2023 at 12:43:45 UTC+1, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 8:35:04 PM UTC-6, Dono. wrote:
> >
> > On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 5:52:57 AM UTC-7, Lou wrote:
> > >
> > > LIGO arms can’t rotate 90degrees,
> >
> > Dumb-du-ram-dumb
> I'm responding to this message only to keep it from getting buried
> in the spam. Okay, a question: why does anyone respond to Lou?
> He obviously has mental problems.

Gary doesn’t have a brain. So he never suffers from mental problems..

On Monday, 2 October 2023 at 03:29:40 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 10/1/2023 8:52 AM, Lou wrote:
> > On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 16:52:39 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> >> On 9/30/2023 4:59 AM, Lou wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 06:31:24 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> >>>> On 9/29/2023 7:33 AM, Alan B wrote:
> >>>>> Is such a thing even possible?
> >>>> I'm sure the LIGO devices are pretty damn close!
> >>>
> >>> Sensitivity maybe yes. But for MMX to be of any use
> >>> one has to be able rotate the table on its Mercury bed
> >>> to check if each arm gets the same reading both
> >>> n+S and E-W
> >>> You can’t rotate any of the arms at Hanford or Livingston
> >>> They always point the same direction.
> >>> So LIGO could never be a MMX device.
> >> They rotate with the earth.
> >
> > LIGO arms can’t rotate 90degrees, like the MMX arms do on the
> > Mercury bed in the original experiment.
> LIGO rotates along with the earth, just like you've been whining about
> the MMX for the last zillion or so posts. Wait 6 hours for a 90 degree
> rotation.

The only rotation of the earth that LIGO could possibly measure is the
small amount of earths rotation that occurs as the setup rotates slightly over the
nanosecond time the light takes to go out and back on LIGO arms

How exactly is earths rotational speed of 1600/k/hour going to change
over any of the 24 hours it takes the earth to do a full rotation?
It’s always rotating at 1600k/hour. All day long.

In other words the Time of flight on either of the two LIGO arms
NEVER changes during earths rotation. The difference in path speeds
is *between* the 2 arms. Where one arm always faces the EW direction
of rotation compared to the other arm always facing N-S
LIGO could never be an MMX.
You relativists are SO stupid.

> > Are you suggesting that if the Michelson Morley experimental setup
> > could not have been rotated on a Mercury bed....they could still have
> > confirmed a null result?
> It would have taken longer, but yes. Didn't they also wait 6 months to
> capture the ether wind from the other direction?

Wrong. The experiment was only conducted for *at most* 4 months.
(Wiki)”The MMX experiment was performed between April and July
1887 by American physicists Michelson and Morley.”

> > In that case..why did they bother with rotating the setup on a Mercury bed?
> To get more useful readings in a shorter time.
>
> I think the mercury was also used for isolation from vibrations.

And as far as your fantasy that the experiment does not need to be rotated in
the lab to detect a change in the interference pattern.... As usual, for a fact
free delusional relativist, you are completely wrong.
It does need to be rotated in the lab to see if there is a fringe change when
the arms change from being parallel to perpendicular to the
expected “aether wind”

(Wiki) ”The mercury trough allowed the device to turn with close to zero friction, so that once having given the sandstone block a single push it would slowly rotate through the entire range of possible angles to the "aether wind", while measurements were continuously observed by looking through the eyepiece. The hypothesis of aether drift implies that because one of the arms would inevitably turn into the direction of the wind at the same time that another arm was turning perpendicularly to the wind, an effect should be noticeable even over a period of minutes.
The expectation was that the effect would be graphable as a sine wave with two peaks and two troughs per rotation of the device. This result could have been expected because during each full rotation, each arm would be parallel to the wind twice (facing into and away from the wind giving identical readings) and perpendicular to the wind twice.”