On 3/12/2011 2:40 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci
et...
On 3/11/2011 3:29 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

The "full Moon" was on 2008/01/22. The distance was about 365 000 km.

Quite incorrect, since perigee was 366435 km on the 19th. Your number is
way too low for what it would have been on the 22nd.

Do you ever check anything for correctness?

I am asking if radio waves are faster than light.

Radio waves and light are the same thing except we call them something
different due to wavelength.

Now is possibility to measure the both between the Earth and Moon and speed
of radio waves between Mars and Earth..
For centuries is possibility to measure speed of light in space between
Jovian and Earth.

Probably the Moon is to close to the Earth to pick up the difference. Is it
enough at full correctness?
S*



Tests of earth to moon to earth, earth to venus to earth all give the
same speed of light regardless of frequency used.

tom
K0TAR

"tom" napisal w wiadomosci
et...
On 3/12/2011 2:40 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

I am asking if radio waves are faster than light.

Radio waves and light are the same thing except we call them something
different due to wavelength.

Now is possibility to measure the both between the Earth and Moon and
speed
of radio waves between Mars and Earth..
For centuries is possibility to measure speed of light in space between
Jovian and Earth.

Probably the Moon is to close to the Earth to pick up the difference. Is
it
enough at full correctness?

Tests of earth to moon to earth, earth to venus to earth all give the same
speed of light regardless of frequency used.

It is an obiect of interesting for ages. The first was observing of color
changes of Io (Jovian's satellite). But the difference in light frequences
are small.
But light and radio waves have extremally different frequences. You wrote:
"Tests of earth to moon to earth, earth to venus to earth all give the
same speed of light regardless of frequency used." Write "if radio waves
are faster than light".

Speed of light in space is known thanks Roemer.s method. Now are radio
transmitters on the Mars and is possibility to use the Roemer's method for
radio waves. NASA know the results. Are thy pulished?
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"tom" napisal w wiadomosci
et...
On 3/12/2011 2:40 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

I am asking if radio waves are faster than light.

Radio waves and light are the same thing except we call them something
different due to wavelength.

Now is possibility to measure the both between the Earth and Moon and
speed
of radio waves between Mars and Earth..
For centuries is possibility to measure speed of light in space between
Jovian and Earth.

Probably the Moon is to close to the Earth to pick up the difference. Is
it
enough at full correctness?

Tests of earth to moon to earth, earth to venus to earth all give the same
speed of light regardless of frequency used.

It is an obiect of interesting for ages. The first was observing of color
changes of Io (Jovian's satellite). But the difference in light frequences
are small.
But light and radio waves have extremally different frequences. You wrote:
"Tests of earth to moon to earth, earth to venus to earth all give the
same speed of light regardless of frequency used." Write "if radio waves
are faster than light".

Speed of light in space is known thanks Roemer.s method. Now are radio
transmitters on the Mars and is possibility to use the Roemer's method for
radio waves. NASA know the results. Are thy pulished?
S*

The speed of light and the speed of radio waves are identical, you babbling
idiot.

Light and radio waves are the same thing at different frequencies, you
droooing cretin.

If you had ever read anything written less than 100 years ago, you would
know all this was proved long ago, you gibbering moron.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


Speed of light in space is known thanks Roemer.s method. Now are radio
transmitters on the Mars and is possibility to use the Roemer's method
for
radio waves. NASA know the results. Are they published?
S*

The speed of light and the speed of radio waves are identical, you
babbling
idiot.

Light and radio waves are the same thing at different frequencies, you
droooing cretin.

If you had ever read anything written less than 100 years ago, you would
know all this was proved long ago, you gibbering moron.

In todays textbooks is wrote that speed of light is frequency dependent
(glass prism).
The same is in air (atmosphere). Why the heliosphere is different?
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


Speed of light in space is known thanks Roemer.s method. Now are radio
transmitters on the Mars and is possibility to use the Roemer's method
for
radio waves. NASA know the results. Are they published?
S*

The speed of light and the speed of radio waves are identical, you
babbling
idiot.

Light and radio waves are the same thing at different frequencies, you
droooing cretin.

If you had ever read anything written less than 100 years ago, you would
know all this was proved long ago, you gibbering moron.

In todays textbooks is wrote that speed of light is frequency dependent
(glass prism).

You can't read, you babbling moron, that is NOT what today's textbooks
say.

The speed of light is not frequency dependent, it is medium dependent,
that is it is dependent on the refractive index of the medium.

The refractive index of a medium is frequency dependent.

You haven't a clue which is the cause and which is the effect.

The same is in air (atmosphere). Why the heliosphere is different?
S*

Yet more meaningless, babbling, nonsense with no connection to reality.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Mar 14, 3:02*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
In todays textbooks is wrote that speed of light is frequency dependent
(glass prism).
The same is in air (atmosphere). Why the heliosphere is different?

The difference of which you speak is very small. The atmosphere is
about 0.27 % of the total distance between the earth and the moon.
0.27% of "very small" would be very, very small.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

"Cecil Moore" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Mar 14, 3:02 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
In todays textbooks is wrote that speed of light is frequency dependent
(glass prism).
The same is in air (atmosphere). Why the heliosphere is different?

The difference of which you speak is very small. The atmosphere is
about 0.27 % of the total distance between the earth and the moon.
0.27% of "very small" would be very, very small.

But heliosphere reach the last planet (at least).
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Cecil Moore" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Mar 14, 3:02 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
In todays textbooks is wrote that speed of light is frequency dependent
(glass prism).
The same is in air (atmosphere). Why the heliosphere is different?

The difference of which you speak is very small. The atmosphere is
about 0.27 % of the total distance between the earth and the moon.
0.27% of "very small" would be very, very small.

But heliosphere reach the last planet (at least).
S*

Yeah, and what is the density, refractive index, permeability, and
permittivity of the helioshpere, you babbling moron?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

tom wrote:
On 3/12/2011 2:40 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci
et...
On 3/11/2011 3:29 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

The "full Moon" was on 2008/01/22. The distance was about 365 000 km.

Quite incorrect, since perigee was 366435 km on the 19th. Your
number is
way too low for what it would have been on the 22nd.

Do you ever check anything for correctness?

I am asking if radio waves are faster than light.

Radio waves and light are the same thing except we call them something
different due to wavelength.

Now is possibility to measure the both between the Earth and Moon and
speed
of radio waves between Mars and Earth..
For centuries is possibility to measure speed of light in space between
Jovian and Earth.

Probably the Moon is to close to the Earth to pick up the difference.
Is it
enough at full correctness?
S*



Tests of earth to moon to earth, earth to venus to earth all give the
same speed of light regardless of frequency used.


Not precisely true. Interplanetary space slightly dispersive. Emphasis
on *slightly*.

Kenelm Philip predicted a difference back in 1957

Modern estimates for electron density in interplanetary space of 1E6 to
1E10 per cubic meter.

dTau = e^2*Ne*L/(2*pi*m*c) * (1/f1^2 - 1/f2^2)

e= charge on an electron 1E-18 Coulomb
m = mass of an electron at rest (9.11E-31 kg)
c = velocity of light (3E8 m/s)
L = propagation distance
Ne = electron density (pick a number between 1E6 and 1E10)

f1 and f2 are the frequencies (in Hz) (assumed relatively closely spaced)

To bound the magnitudes.. for 1000 light year and 1 and 2 GHz, the
dispersion is about 1 nanosecond.


-- if you're interested in optical as opposed to RF
http://ipnpr.jpl.nasa.gov/progress_report/42-65/65I.PDF

Speed of light in space is known thanks Roemer.s method. Now are radio
transmitters on the Mars and is possibility to use the Roemer's method for
radio waves. NASA know the results. Are thy pulished?


Of course, they're published. Widely. I would check Journal of
Geophysical Research or similar publications.

As a practical matter, precise measurements of the time of flight
to/from a spacecraft is used to figure out where the spacecraft is and
its radial velocity.

Typical range accuracy is on the order of a few meters, velocities good
to a few cm/s, for something at the orbit of Neptune or Uranus.

Precise doppler measurements are used for radio science experiments,
e.g. to determine the internal structure of a planet or moon by
precisely measuring the orbit of a satellite. A typical performance for
such a measurement is 1 part in 1E15 over 1000 seconds at 32 GHz or 8GHz.