It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Great Light Deception

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 10:54 AM
link   
This theory sounds like a bad sci-fi novel. I think UFOs and Alien Species exist but the cosmos are so vast i highly doubt they are comming from our moon. And if they were its more likely that the aliens are living under the surface and we wouldnt see any signs of life anyway. I'm not a scientist i dont think that our ozone is a buffer that can slow down light so much that we are seeing a heavenly body like the moon hundreds of years in the past. If you look at global warming the whole problem is the light is getting IN but not out, so it seems logical we can see light at the true speed but maybe others in the galaxy are seeing us at a slower time. How do you explain that the moon looks the same now as it did hundreds of years ago. The theory is flawed.




posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   
I don't know if this has been mentioned or not but our atmoshpere DOES slow light... anything that isn't a vacuum slows light.

The Speed of light is constant only in a vacuum. Light slows down considerably when it travels through dense mediums. Scientifically proven.

Now, it doesn't slow down to a crawl, or long enough to be manipulated in any way, but it does slow. It remains faster than the sound, but slows.

And if there were colonies on the moon they would have been seen. My grandad hasa telescope that can pinpoint the 'canal' lines, small craters and the like on the moon's surface. A honking great building would be pretty easy to see.



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 12:34 PM
link   
" the earth would be colder and uninhabitable if the speed of light was slowed down by our atmosphere as we would lose much of the sol's kinetic energy imo"

well maybe the earth would be 2 hot and uninhabitable if ligh didn't slow the suns "kinetic" energy or heat down

either way this has not much bearing on this theory

and so your saying your grand dad has a telescope that can see the moon clearly, clear enough to zoom in on an area how large " a few hundred miles" or are you saying he has a telescope that can zoom in to an area a few hundred feet on the moon!

[edit on 15-1-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Then you´d be seeing everything in slow motion... like your friends would talk to you in slow motion and cars would pass by you in slow motion...and so on...

but you are partially correct, the speed of light is not or has not always been tyhe same, at least it wasn´t "340000km/s" at the beginning of the universe, this was proved by science a wile ago...



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Here's an interesting article "Putting the brakes on Light" that might shed some light in regards to your theory.


www.smithsonianmagazine.com...



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by kolo_heights

Originally posted by dirty_underground
What about the satellites that orbit space outside of the atmosphere that take pictures? Is it also your theory that we are being decieved by the scientific community that our atmosphere is slowing down light speed?


The scientific community for the most has its hands tied. Real Discoveries are buried within the times. Much like an Hourglass the vast pool of knowledge is slowly leaked, each grain heavily monitored and tested.

Some interesing links:

links:IBM Chip Slows Down Light
www.eurekalert.org...


Right.

To asume this would be to say that we send astronauts into space... and they stay there for several decades to receive a "HI" from Huston? LOL .. I like this "theories" which is an incorrect name given to such a topic.. it would be a "Hypothesis" that is, untill you your self or someone in your command where to actually study, including an actual test to prove your Hypothesis. When you prove your Hypothesis CORRECT it is then a theory. As of now, you have a hypothesis that is not looking to healthy at the moment.

Our atmosphere is not exactly unique, that is, there is no element in the atmosphere that is only found there. Most are common, infact O-Zone and Smog are quite alike, so your hypothesis would be that during a smog alert day in say LA, all light would be "several decades behind" .. the entire logic behind your hypothesis is unfounded and rediculus to say the least.

Jackofblades -


I don't know if this has been mentioned or not but our atmoshpere DOES slow light... anything that isn't a vacuum slows light.

The Speed of light is constant only in a vacuum. Light slows down considerably when it travels through dense mediums. Scientifically proven.


As far as I know, the Atmosphere bends light, distorts it, but does not slow it. If it where slowed at all, then it would not be significant at all. The strongest force to act on light is gravity. The same would go for time, Gravity can bend it and slow it, not gases.

[edit on 1/15/2007 by Rockpuck]



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 04:14 PM
link   
You can always see the shadow cast on the sphere of the moon based on where the sun is, so if what you are postulating is true, the shadow would appear arbitrary compared to the position of the sun, no?



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Nope, quite right, any material through which light passes changes the speed of light within it. It has to do with plasmon interactions with the photons. This change in speed is what causes refraction. For the most part, the change in speed is also not linear with frequency, one color of light may be slowed more than another for instance. This is called dispersion. I run into dispersion sending data with a radio, from day to day the waveforms will change slightly due to the various Fourier components propagating at different rates. It smears out nice sharp edges. You have to watch out for that in radar work also.

However, this change in speed is quite small for gases. For EM propagating through or along solids, the effect is more pronounced. For example, when I'm laying out a PCB for a circuit with high frequencies, tight timings or both, I actually have to take into account the speed-of-light propagation time, and that will vary depending on the material I'm using in the PCB.

But, no, you're not seeing decades into the past looking up through the atmosphere. Your spirits need to go take some physics courses.



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 04:17 PM
link   
This thread reminds me of a SCIFI short story that I read several years ago. About how the gov't built a machine that could "see" into the past up to approximately 100 years. The concept was that everything emits a frequency (light) into the universe that technically could be focused in on and you could see events that occurred in the past up to the 100 year limit. The nefarious side of the technology was the question of when does the 'past' actually begin? Is it 1 year, 1 month, 1 day... The hook of the story was that the past begins in real time so the scientists inadvertently created a machine that could see anything in the world milliseconds after it happened. The machine was capable of seeing anything/person it wanted and what they were up to at anytime. If anyone knows the title or author of this story please post it as I would like to read it again.



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by kolo_heights
I've recently been hypothesising on our solar system...

...what if our atmosphere acts as an almost light buffer, considerably slowing light down.

This could potentially mean that when we gaze at the Moon we are actually staring at it decades if not hundreds of years into the past. Therefore potentially the moon could currently (in realtime) be a beautifully terraformed, enriched planet.

This is known as the Great Light Deception.



Apologies for the one-line post, but doesn't this thread belong in Skunkworks?



posted on Jan, 15 2007 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Now light does travel more slowly in air than it does in a vacuum, and still slower in water, a mere 139,500 miles a second.

math.ucr.edu...

www.geom.uiuc.edu...

micro.magnet.fsu.edu...



posted on Jan, 16 2007 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Hundreds of thousands of years looking into the past. So I dont understand are you saying light really tavels at the speed of a normal car, I mean itmakes no sense.

Though I beleive in therre being cover-ups one on the scale you are talking about it impossible.

Thanks for a great thread title with an absolutley drugged out thought process, if there ever was a ridiculous high thought this would be it.




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join