<div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);font-family:verdana">Tom,</span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);font-family:verdana"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);font-family:verdana">Perhaps the present value of c is just an asymptotic value. And in this context, the PRESENT could be as large as 10,000 years or more. </span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);font-family:verdana"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);font-family:verdana">300yrs would be too small a duration, to detect a noticeable change, considering the age of universe to be as large as 14B LY?</span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="color:rgb(17,17,17);font-family:verdana"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana">I agree with you on time dilation, but here(link below) Richard Muller is saying that he has himself seen the length contraction in labs:</font></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana"><br></font></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana"><a href="https://www.quora.com/Is-length-contraction-only-a-result-related-to-observation-or-a-real-contraction/answer/Richard-Muller-3" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://www.quora.com/Is-length-contraction-only-a-result-related-to-observation-or-a-real-contraction/answer/Richard-Muller-3</a><br></font></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana"><br></font></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana">I am sure many other will have similar experience/observation. And we cannot deny what we observe, irrespective of what we think and what theory we support.</font></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana"><br></font></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana">Tufail </font></div><div dir="auto"><font color="#111111" face="verdana"><br></font></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, 23:43 <a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a> <<a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Tufail, Our devices are certainly made of "earthly matter", but as all matter originated with the BB, all matter is universal (was that a pun?). We do have "some evidence" that the speed of light is constant, but it is by no means proven. There is speculation, following the more recent (and therefore more accurate) tests of the speed of light, which shows that instead of all results being around the present speed, which one would expect, the speed was faster and is slowing down. <div>See : - <a href="https://creation.com/speed-of-light-slowing-down-after-all" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://creation.com/speed-of-light-slowing-down-after-all</a> .<div><br><div>This is an excerpt from that web page. I did have a much better one saved on my PC showing the researchers name, the year, and findings, but unfortunately cannot find it now after a serious PC crash and rebuild.<div><br></div><div><p style="margin:0cm 36pt 12pt 0cm;line-height:17.15pt;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">Barry Setterfield collated data of
measurements of c spanning a period of about 300 years. He claimed that rather
than fluctuating around both sides of the present value as measurements became
more accurate, they had progressively declined from a point significantly
higher than today’s value. He proposed that this decline had been exponential
in nature, i.e. very rapid early on, gradually easing to stabilize at today’
value for c, just a few decades ago.</span><sup style="box-sizing:inherit"><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">3</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 36pt 0.0001pt 0cm;line-height:17.15pt;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial;box-sizing:inherit"><a name="m_6450036348356068970_m_3223709070659756352_m_1322916743369569862_m_-1526971356823295853_m_-3451039774789480949_f4" style="box-sizing:inherit" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer"></a><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">He and
Trevor Norman, a mathematician from </span><u></u><u></u><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">Flinders</span><u></u><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111"> </span><u></u><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">University</span><u></u><u></u><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111"> in </span><u></u><u></u><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">South
Australia</span><u></u><u></u><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">, published a monograph</span><sup style="box-sizing:inherit"><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111">4</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#111111"> outlining this, and answering several
arguments raised against the theory. The monograph also showed how, over the
past years, the measurements of the value of various constants (e.g. electron
mass, Planck’s constant (h)) were varying progressively, if ever so slightly,
in a ‘directional’ fashion consistent with the direction predicted by their
mathematical linkage with ‘c’.<u></u><u></u></span></p></div><div><br></div><div>As other galaxies are also made of the same matter (if we discount anti-matter, which may well have anti-gravity [from our point of view, not theirs]) and therefore not belong in the same quasi universe. I say quasi universe because it is an oxymoron to use the plural of universe. Their quasi universe would, by necessity, be so far removed from ours that there could be no reaction with it in any way.</div><div><div>I do not believe that time dilates and length contracts either, these are not real events, they are mathematical artifacts. The real world can always be expressed by mathematics, but mathematics doe not always represent the real world. Maths is the servant of physics, not its master, but Einstein (and others) turned this on its head, and made physics subservient to maths. That is when it all started to go horribly wrong.</div><div><br></div><div>Tom Hollings<br><div><br><div><br>
<br>
----Original Message----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:tufail.abbas@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">tufail.abbas@gmail.com</a><br>
Date: 28/11/2018 20:06 <br>
To: <<a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a>>, "General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list"<<a href="mailto:physics@tuks.nl" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">physics@tuks.nl</a>><br>
Subj: Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 19, Issue 5<br>
<br>
<div dir="auto"><div>Tom,</div><div dir="auto">I was really careful in wording this part, still it has created confusion. :)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Our point of observation is earth (or say the solar system) and the 21st Century is the time (which is a also a function of the expanding volume of the universe). And the our devices of observation are made of earthly matter of electron, proton and neutron.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">So from this point of observatiom at this time if we observe using the instruments of earthly matter, I believe that we have reasonable evidence that speed of light is constant, and it has to be that value and no other value. And speed of light should be related to how the universe is evolving under these constraints.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">For observers beyond the aforesaid space, it can neither be proved or disproved , whether the speed is same. <span style="font-family:sans-serif">If large scale configuration of space ( i.e. distribution of mater and additional volume created) changes, which correspond to time change considerably, there are reasons to doubt whether speed of light will still remain constant even on earth. Furthermore, it is simply an overconfidence if we declare that instrument made from aforesaid earthly matter, can survive in other galaxies. But our scientific knowledge has not progressed enough to address these extended questions, so these are not so immediate concern. </span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif">The question of immediate concern is that why should the earthly matter, located at earth in 21st century observe the speed of light as constant. Einstein told us the reason that time dilates and length contracts as we speed up. I may personally </span><span style="font-family:sans-serif">not believe in his explanation and I am sure that there are many other who also do not believe. Nevertheless, not believing is not enough, unless better explanations is produced and demonstrated through experiments. . </span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif">Regards,</span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif">Tufail Abbas</span></div><div dir="auto"><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr">On Wed, 28 Nov 2018, 22:33 <a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a> <<a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Tufail, would you explain this please :- "<span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Speed of light </span><span style="text-decoration:underline">(as we observe at present moment/era)</span><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"> is so fundamental to the nature of reality , that without it space-time will cease to </span><span style="font-weight:bold">evolve and expand</span><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">, which becomes a motion-less Universe."</span><div>Do you mean the speed of light being the value that it is. and it has to be that value, or would any other constant speed do? Also do you mean c WRT all observers (which has not been proved, despite claims that it has), or c WRT its source .</div><div><br></div><div>Tom Hollings.</div><div><br>
<br>
----Original Message----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:tufail.abbas@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">tufail.abbas@gmail.com</a><br>
Date: 28/11/2018 16:12 <br>
To: "General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list"<<a href="mailto:physics@tuks.nl" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">physics@tuks.nl</a>><br>
Subj: Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 19, Issue 5<br>
<br>
<div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">Hello Doug,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thanks for those videos!!</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">You did an interesting experiment, though I feel, that perhaps all cases are not discussed. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I wonder if it would be beneficial to discuss those cases.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I wonder what would happen if both magnet and disc are co-rotating but in opposite/ counter clockwise direction. Will it give a negative or positive voltage?.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I wonder what would happen if position of magnet and disc is interchanged and all cases are repeated.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div>However I would like to clarify when I said that "it cannot be measured<span style="font-weight:bold">"</span>, I mean the <span style="font-weight:bold">absolute impossibility </span>of measuring/ detecting. Not that it is not measurable by using one method but possible to measure by using another method. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Speed of light <span style="text-decoration:underline">(as we observe at present moment/era)</span> is so fundamental to the nature of reality , that without it space-time will cease to <span style="font-weight:bold">evolve and expand</span>, which becomes a motion-less Universe. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Hence time (which is detected from motion) and space (which is measured only when time is available) are no more detectable, though they may exist as information/knowledge on <span style="font-weight:bold">landscape of all possibilities </span>untill such time Universe chooses to evolve in one way or the other with a particular reality.<span style="font-weight:bold"> </span>And landscape of all possibilities is not a physical object.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Regards</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Tufail Abbas</div><div dir="auto"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr"><br></div></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div></div></div>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div>