"Zen says moderation in all things, Doctors say Medication in all things"
BTW, here are 2 ways to measure the one way speed of light (distinguishing Lorentz Ether Theory & Special Relativity) with one or zero clocks! Analogy, imagine you know how fast cars go around a track composed on 2 straight parallel roads with banked hairpin ends, but not how fast they go in each leg. Now fill one leg with cars bumper to bumper and post a speed limit that's a slow crawl, while th either leg is to be taken at extreme speed. The cars per hours happen in each leg, but one leg weigh's less than one car potentially on average and the other leg has the weight of every other car. So in one instant you can measure the weight of each track and know by implication the speed of the cars in each direction. Light has gravity so it still works, but you could also have electrons approximate the speed so the slower leg will have a greater electric field density. You could alternatively use muons or something that decays and note more radiation from one leg which is equivalent to asking the drivers to record the time they note each leg to take. If you imagine the aether frame and being in that prefered frame, you could take off move in one direction at .99C for 1000 seconds and then instantly come to a stop and reverse trajectory at the same speed for 10 seconds, then stop and head off in the initial direction for 1000 seconds and so on. So it's 100 steps forward and one step back, that gives an average velocity, so if this zigzag motion was contained in a ship with a smoothed average speed we would have this same setup, but we are now appreciating it from the prefered aether frame. So we can see that the dwell time is longer because the path is literally longer. I would also note that if SR were valid, think about a photon coming towards you, while we might not be able in SR's view to know the speed of the light, it is illogical to therefore conclude it doesn't have a speed to you. There is no such thing as a fuzzy speed if a thing has an exact position (putting aside QM) in space at and time which would be agreed by those occupying that space in that moment regardless of their inertial frame. And while it might be half the speed of light from your perspective (if light in the other direction is ~instantaneous) it can't be slower, so we have a range. As the one way speed of light is a very real and exact velocity, we must conclude that whatever the speed is within the metric of our frame, that we don't need to have a ruler, a clock, or 2 clocks, a computer or a brain for that light to have a speed. And so if speed is only defined by measurement and not created by it, as clearly light moves either way, then an inability to measure that speed in SR due to clock sync effects (though, I provided above ways it could be done above and SR can't account for it) does not mean we can't give it an example speed, or run through each of the examples within the possible range. And if we then begin moving towards that light, that photon approaching us well there should be velocity addition increasing the relative velocity such that if it were previously C, it would not be C+, and LET assumed that this does occur, and it has a solution! It shrinks your length and slows your time so the light moves even faster as the photon has a shorter distance to travel and less time occurs in your frame, so C+++! This however is to make the round trip of light unchanged, but we see that it sacrifices the one way speed of light under the bus. So SR takes Lorent's mechanisms and changes nothing about them other than defining them as changes of space not length, and a slowing of time not slowing of clocks which changes nothing about what it occuring to the speed of light. It borrows a mechanism that makes the one way speed of light diverge even more wildly from C than it would without it, leaves it unchanged and then asserts axiomatically we believe what should be seen as absurd even before these mechanisms and deny it all because if we can't measure something (which I've proven false in the race track experience) that is doesn't exist, not only that we can't define it, but that it is undefined even in principle! SR is meant to be Epistemic (relating to knowledge or to the degree of its validation), but on the contrary, we know that light is coming to us, has a real speed, and that there is no such thing as an "unreal speed" that it could possess. It is confusing measurability with knowledge, but in doing so it is inviting the person being indoctrinated to blind themselves to logic. There are many other problems with SR, but to someone who has accepted making themselves ignorant of something so inescapably true, it is impossible to reach them unless they are willing to accept that the form of Epistemic model that SR is, is one which at it's outset asserts impossible things with zero cause in evidence of logic (being that there were no one way speed of light measurements to inspire it and Lorentz et el already solved the 2 way consistency) and asks the believer to ignore the stolen mechanisms and how they work and to also ignore what they can know by rock solid deduction. And then Einstein asserts that GR needs an Aether, and has frame dragging, which is induced motion of space by moving relative to it and inducing effects by making space move relative to another. How can space be moved and moving and not have a frame?! Clearly if you can move it, drag it with you it gives it a relative direction, for some it's moving in that direction in which it was dragged, but for someone moving even faster in that same direction it couldn't be moving for them in that direction as it's overtaking the thing that influenced it. Jonathan On Sat, Apr 4, 2026 at 10:01 PM William Beaty <[email protected]> wrote: > > Coffee mug, one side says in small letters "You are not a real scientist > until you have..." "ENEMIES IN ACADEMIA!" > > Also, "MEDITATION IN ALL THINGS." (Zen says moderation, not meditation.) > > Also, black Bene Gesseritt robes which look white under a sun that emits a > 750nM NIR spectrum-peak. But one of them reads KICK ME on the back, > written in big black letters made with carbon-based ink. (Certain black > cloth appears white in the NIR band, because the dye is extreme blue, and > not a broadband absorber like carbon-black. ) > > Congo-blue filters, and tee shirts with the "black" cloth > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I749pOpGc3k > > See for example this unlisted video above. Make tee shirts which > invisibly read OBEY. SUBMIT. CONSUME. MARRY and REPRODUCE, and only the > infrared security cameras can see it. Cameras, or also humans wearing my > welding goggles with three layers of congo blue filter. (Only functions in > bright sunlight of course.) For SF conventions, sell black t-shirts with > invisible slogan "Chlorine breathing reptoids out of US congress!" > > > > > On Thu, 12 Mar 2026, Esa “LacklusterOfficial” Ruoho wrote: > > > > What are we against?LORENZ GAUGING > > > > > > > > > What's your best t-shirt idea? Also, bumber-stickers. (I find that > > > if I give away my best ones, then EVEN BETTER ideas will appear in my > > > head.) > > > > > > I'll only give you my kilowatt source of > > relativistic hydrogen ions > > when you pry it out of my > > COLD DEAD TENTACLES. > > > > > > ..it's not the size of your Tesla-coils, > > it's what you do with them. > > > > > > (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > billb at amasci com http://amasci.com > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair > Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
